Tag: President Mohamed Nasheed

Chair of Parliament’s Executive Oversight Committee claims CNI report “flawed” based on the findings “so far”

The Chair of Parliament’s Executive Oversight Committee, MP Ali Waheed, has claimed the August 2012 report produced by the Commission of National Inquiry (CNI) was “flawed” based on the findings of the committee “so far”.

The Commonwealth-backed report investigated the circumstances surrounding the controversial transfer of power in February 2012.

MP Waheed, of the opposition Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP), made the claim in a press conference held by the parliament select committee in the early hours of Saturday.

Waheed said many interviewed by the committee claimed the CNI report lacked “key information they had given [the CNI panel]”.

“Some have even claimed their information was wrongly presented,” he said, but declined to reveal the identity of those who made the claim.

The committee previously requested President Mohamed Waheed Hassan to hand over statements of key figures of the former government and military officials given to CNI. The request was rejected and a bid by the committee to issue a legal order demanding the information failed when a vote was put to the members.

MP Waheed on Saturday described the president’s refusal to share the information as a “blessing in disguise”.

“Some people who attended the committee [meeting] have told us that key information they gave was missing from the CNI report, and said they did not accept its findings,” he said.

The opposition-controlled committee is conducting a parliamentary inquiry on the controversial transfer of power, while also reviewing the CNI report.

A 22 day continuous anti-government protest led by then opposition figures, religious scholars and mutinying police and military officials, following the controversial detention of Chief Judge of Criminal Court Abdulla Mohamed, led to the sudden resignation of then-President Mohamed Nasheed. Nasheed and his party later alleged he was forced out of office in a coup d’etat.

However in August 2012 the CNI formed by incoming President Mohamed Waheed Hassan and backed by the Commonwealth released a report declaring the transfer of power was legitimate.

As part of its present inquiry, the parliament’s committee has summoned former intelligence heads of the police and the Maldives National Defense Force (MNDF), including Superintendent Mohamed ‘MC’ Hameed and Brigadier General Ahmed Nilam.

Last Friday the committee summoned former SAARC Secretary General and Human Rights Minister Dhiyana Saeed, former Commissioner of Police Ahmed Faseeh and former Police Superintendent Mohamed Jinah. It has also announced that two international experts will take part in assisting the inquiry for a period of two weeks.

“Huge crime against the state”

According to Waheed the parliamentary inquiry was “revealing” information suggesting a “huge crime against the state” involving individuals, leaders of political parties and senior figures within the police and the military.

“From what we have found out, the committee has come to the conclusion that the events very much involved the stakes of two pivotal figures. They are President Nasheed and President Waheed. This I say because the events involved people who were loyal to both Nasheed and Waheed,” he said.

He also admitted the names of several people have been floated within the committee who needed to be questioned in the course of the inquiry, including the former president and his successor. Others included former Home Minister Hassan Afeef, former Defense Minister Tholhath Ibrahim Kaleyfaanu and key senior officials of Nasheed’s administration.

MP Waheed also reiterated that a lot of people had been hesitant to speak to the CNI as it was formed by President Waheed’s government and included senior figures of the events of February 7. Some of those people cabinet positions, Waheed said.

“In light of what we have come to know, a lot of people were eager to raise their concern and share information regarding the [controversial transfer of power], but they were not sure of the right person to should share their concerns with,” he said.

A similar notion was put forward by Dhiyana Saeed in her personal memoir, in which she wrote of a plot by Nasheed’s political opponents to assassinate him.

“I desperately needed to consult someone but who? … I couldn’t go to my associates on this side because now I didn’t know whose hands were tainted and whose hands weren’t. The politics was so bitter, so deeply divided and so polarized that if I happened to confide in the wrong person I thought what I had to say would be reported to the wrong people and covered-up,” she wrote, in her memoir.

Meanwhile, Waheed noted security concerns raised by those who appeared before the committee, claiming they were “at risk” for sharing such confidential information.

“Some individuals who have given witness to the committee have raised concerns over their security and requested security. The committee has debated the matter and already informed the speaker [of its views],” he said.

“I don’t deny the fact that we may need to summon more people in the coming days. Some of the names of people we plan to summon may not be even mentioned in CNI report,” he said.

Asked of former SAARC Secretary General and Human Rights Minister Dhiyana Saeed’s allegations of assassination attempts against Nasheed, Waheed said the committee would look into the allegations.

“The committee will very seriously look into the concerns raised by Dhiyana of a plotted assassination of former President Mohamed Nasheed,” he said.

“Inquiry is not politically motivated” – MP Ali Waheed

Challenged as to the credibility of the report, given that the committee had an opposition majority, Waheed said that they had decided to look into the matter not based on any “political motives”, and that the inquiry was solely based upon “national interest”.

“The committee’s findings will not produce politicised results. We are summoning key stakeholders including those in senior positions in the government.  The findings will not be based on the word of one just one person. We will not include any allegation against anyone without verifying it,” he said.

He added that the inquiry was not about the two former presidents or about President Waheed.

“This is not about the Progressive Party of Maldives (PPM) or the MDP. This is not an inquiry carried out by putting key political actors in a single chart and drawing conclusions for political benefit.”

He also affirmed that no unverified claims would be included in the report.

“[The report] will be based on information given by key people in positions of the state, who by the constitution are obliged to give true information,” he said.

Waheed also expressed confidence the report will unveil the truth of what happened on February last year, and said the committee was even willing to go to a public debate with those who wished to challenge its findings.

Presidents Office Spokesperson Masood Imad was not responding at time of press.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

“Technical problem” prevented former President Nasheed from leaving, Immigration Department claims

Former President Mohamed Nasheed was prevented from leaving the country yesterday (December 21) to visit his ill father in Bangkok, Thailand due to a “technical problem,” the Department of Immigration and Emigration has claimed.

Nasheed was told by immigration officials on Friday morning that his passport was held because of a court order by the Hulhumale’ Magistrate Court that had been sent to the department on December 18 imposing a travel ban on the former president.

The formerly ruling Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) presidential candidate is currently on trial at the Hulhumale’ Magistrate Court over charges of illegally detaining Chief Judge of the Criminal Court Abdulla Mohamed in January this year.

However, on December 18, the Hulhumale’ Magistrate Court authorised the former President to travel overseas between December 19, 2012 and January 6, 2013. The letter granting permission to travel was signed by Magistrate Hussain Mazeed.

Following the incident on Friday morning, the Hulhumale’ Magistrate Court confirmed to local media that the Immigration Department was informed of the decision on December 18.

In a statement later in the day, the Immigration Department said the court order lifting the travel ban was received and entered into the system.

However, Nasheed was told his passport had been withheld due to a “technical problem with the system,” the Immigration Department claimed.

“The issue has now been identified and fixed a short while ago,” the statement read. The department did not elaborate on the nature of the “technical problem”.

Controller of Immigration Dr Mohamed Ali told Minivan News today that the system error “affected both arrivals and departures from 7:30am to about 2:00pm.”

He added that the incident involving the former President was “the only case” of a passport being held due to the disruption.

“The system at airport did not show the release, while the release was entered on Wednesday (December 18). It was a simple system dependent decision by the duty officer at that time.  We have apologised to [Nasheed] and all who were affected and even have a letter sent to him assuring that he can leave during the specified period,” Dr Ali said.

However, the Immigration Controller told newspaper Haveeru on Friday that Nasheed’s passport was held due to a court order.

“He cannot leave until the court orders [the passport] to be released. When he wants to go somewhere, the court will instruct us to release it within a certain period,” Dr Mohamed Ali was quoted as saying.

Nasheed was reportedly due to leave for Bangkok on a private visit ahead of his father’s surgery.

Former President Nasheed’s office meanwhile issued a statement contending the move blocking the former President’s departure was in violation of the constitution.

The statement noted that article 128 of the constitution entitles former Presidents to “the highest honour, dignity, protection, financial privileges and other privileges entitled to a person who has served in the highest office of the land.”

Moreover, article 41 of the constitution guarantees “the freedom to enter, remain in and leave the Maldives” to every citizen.

“This office condemns in the harshest terms the act by the current government to deliberately obstruct President Nasheed from leaving the country for his father’s operation,” the press release stated.

It added that the Immigration Controller’s claims in the media that a travel ban had been imposed by a court order on December 18 was a “deliberate falsehood.”

The Hulhumale’ Magistrate Court informed Nasheed’s lawyers on Friday afternoon that the Immigration Department was sent the court order lifting the travel ban.

The statement called on the government to “respect the constitution and immediately cease these attempts to harass and hassle President Nasheed.”

The former President’s office also called on the Hulhumale’ Magistrate Court to take action against the Controller of Immigration for making false claims regarding the court.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Former President Nasheed’s trial politically motivated: Bar Human Rights Committee

The trial of former President Mohamed Nasheed on charges of illegally detaining a judge appears to be a politically motivated attempt to bar the Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) candidate from the 2013 presidential election, the Bar Human Rights Committee (BHRC) concluded in a report launched on Thursday (December 13).

The report was compiled by Stephen Cragg on behalf of the BHRC, the international human rights arm of the Bar of England and Wales, following a visit to the Maldives from November 3 to 6 to observe hearings of former President Nasheed’s trial.

“BHRC notes that Mr Nasheed’s lawyers have petitioned the prosecutor-general to review whether the prosecution of Mr Nasheed is in the public interest, and it seems to BHRC that this is an application worthy of very serious consideration,” the report stated.

“BHRC is concerned that a primary motivation behind the present trial is a desire by those in power to exclude Mr Nasheed from standing in the 2013 elections, and notes international opinion that this would not be a positive outcome for the Maldives.”

According to a press release by the BHRC, the report was based on “an investigation into the circumstances surrounding the trial of ex-President Mohamed Nasheed.” The BHRC observer, Stephen Cragg, is a member of the bar and barrister at Doughty Street Chambers.

Former President Nasheed faces criminal charges for the military’s controversial detention of Chief Judge of the Criminal Court Abdulla Mohamed on January 16 this year.

Home Minister Hassan Afeef sought to justify the arrest at the time on the grounds that the judge was a national security threat after he blocked investigation of his misconduct by the judicial watchdog and quashed a police summons for him.

The judge had “taken the entire criminal justice system in his fist,” Afeef said, accusing Abdulla Mohamed of obstructing high-profile corruption cases, releasing murder suspects, colluding with drug traffickers, and barring media from corruption trials.

Judge Abdulla “hijacked the whole court” by deciding that he alone could issue search warrants, Afeef contended, and had arbitrarily suspended court officers.

In the conclusions of the BHRC report, the author observed that the detention of the judge was “not a simple case of abuse of power.”

“Rather, the underlying narrative of the situation is that of a president desperate to bring change to a new democracy after decades of oppression, and finding himself thwarted by the inability of the organs of state set up by the constitution to deliver much needed  reform,” the report stated.

Referring to “the large number of international reports” that have found the Maldivian judiciary to be flawed, the BHRC noted that the Judicial Service Commission (JSC) “failed in its twin tasks of ensuring that the judiciary has the appropriate experience and qualifications, and in bringing to book the judges who fail to fully and fairly implement the rule of law.”

“Implicit in these criticisms is that Mr Nasheed cannot be guaranteed a fair trial,” the report concluded.

The BHRC also expressed concern with the “deterioration of human rights protection in the Maldives since the transfer of power in February 2012” as reported by Amnesty International and the International Federation of Human Rights (FIDH).

“Again, a failure to comply with human rights standards by the Maldivian authorities is a grave threat to the democracy so recently achieved,” the report stated.

“How the Maldives deals with this prosecution and trial (if it goes ahead) may well decide the course of its government for years to come.”

Back in September, the government criticised Amnesty International’s report, “The Other side of Paradise: A Human Rights Crisis in the Maldives”, as being “one sided”.

The BHRC is a UK-based independent body “concerned with protecting the rights of advocates, judges and human rights defenders around the world.”

JSC and failure of oversight

The BHRC report also noted that article 285 of the constitution mandated the JSC to determine whether or not the judges on the bench possessed “the educational qualifications, experience and recognized competence necessary to discharge the duties and responsibilities of a judge, [and] high moral character.”

“However, the JSC  failed to bring in any standards in the two years allowed and in August 2010 almost all judges, good and bad, were re-instated in post at that point amidst much controversy,” the report observed.

It added that the International Committee of Jurists (ICJ) expressed concern with the JSC’s failure to “fulfil its constitutional mandate of proper vetting and reappointment of judges.”

“The JSC (made up of politicians, lawyers and judges) has also been criticised as ineffective in its other role of overseeing  complaints about judges. Complaints about the worst judges built up and were not investigated. A large number of complaints were made about the head of the criminal court in Malé, Judge Abdulla Mohamed,” the BHRC report explained.

“In an open letter to parliament in March 2011, former President Nasheed’s member on the JSC and outspoken whistle-blower, Aishath Velezinee, claimed that the politically-manipulated JSC was protecting Judge Abdulla.

She claimed this protection was provided despite the existence of “reasonable proof to show that Chief Judge of the Criminal Court Abdulla Mohamed was systematically committing the atrocity of setting free dangerous criminals and declaring them innocent with complete disregard to the evidence [presented at court].”

Despite Judge Abdulla having been sentenced for a criminal offence, Velezinee wrote that Speaker Abdulla Shahid pushed for his reappointment and later “bequeathed the Criminal Court to Abdulla Mohamed until 2026″ under the Judges Act, which was passed hastily during the constitutional crisis period in July-August 2010.

Velezinee meanwhile told the author of the BHRC report that it was “the State’s duty to remove [Judge Abdulla] from the judiciary”.

“She has written a remarkable memoir of her time on the JSC, describing the machinations and tribulations of the Committee, and its failure to establish ethical or moral standards for judges,” the report noted.

Meanwhile, on January 16, 2012, “frustrated by an inability to remove allegedly bad judges, President Nasheed (or one of his ministers, it is still not entirely clear) ordered the detention of Judge Abdulla,” the BHRC report continued.

“He was taken to an island and kept there for almost three weeks, despite the protests of lawyers and judges. It does not seem that he was badly treated, and the government emphasised the lack of other effective powers to justify its actions.”

It added that the Supreme Court demanded the immediate release of the judge “as he was arrested not in conformity with the laws and regulations, and the acts of MNDF [Maldives National Defence Force] was outside its mandatory power.”

The trial

Former President Nasheed’s trial is set to resume after the Supreme Court on December 5 decided in a 4-3 ruling that the Hulhumale’ Magistrate Court hearing the case was legitimate.

The BHRC report noted that Nasheed was charged under article 81 of the penal code, which states: “It shall be an offence for any public servant to use the authority of his office to intentionally arrest or detain any innocent person in a manner contrary to law. A person guilty of this offence shall be punished with exile or imprisonment for a period not exceeding 3 years or a fine not exceeding MVR 2,000.”

The former President’s legal team informed the author that “a range of defences will be advanced” in his trial.

“For example, is the President a public servant to whom the Article applies? Does the Article relate only to the person who, in fact, takes a person into custody or directly orders an arrest? What effect does the term ‘innocent’ have in the Article?” the report explained.

“The team is to request that the Prosecutor General reconsiders whether the prosecution against Mr Nasheed should proceed, arguing that it is not in the public interest that it should do so. It was explained that if Mr Nasheed is sentenced to more than a year in custody then (even if he is immediately pardoned) he will be excluded from running in the 2013 elections.”

The author of the report also spoke to a number of lawyers, politicians and the Prosecutor General during their visit, and “almost all criticised the failure of the JSC to bring about reform of the judiciary in the way expected by the new constitution.”

“Opinion was split between those who thought there was no option  but to prosecute Nasheed, and those who wanted the wider context to be taken into account by the prosecutor,” the report noted.

“There was a strong  feeling amongst some that the politicians of the old regime had escaped prosecution for much worse abuses of power. The foreign government representatives I spoke to clearly see Nasheed as a force for good in the region and desperately want a solution  to the current proceedings which will allow him to stand in the election next year.”

Independent MP Mohamed ‘Kutti’ Nasheed, chair of parliament’s Independent Institutions Oversight Committee, meanwhile explained that the absence of powers to replace members of the JSC “severely restricted” the parliamentary committee from ensuring that the JSC was functioning effectively.

Nasheed also criticised the Supreme Court for overturning Acts of Parliament that “purported to legislate for the justice system” as part of its stance that “anything to do with the administration of justice was a matter for the [Supreme] Court.”

Former MP Ibrahim Ismail ‘Ibra’, chair of the constitution drafting committee of the Special Majlis, meanwhile contended that the President “had no choice but to arrest Judge Abdulla” as the only option to “remove a rogue judge from the criminal justice system.”

Ibra explained that the “backdrop to President Nasheed taking or authorising the action he did against the judge” was the JSC’s failure to investigate serious complaints, some dating back to 2005.

“However, when the JSC did adjudicate against Judge Abdulla in one case, the Judge went to the civil court and obtained an injunction against the JSC to stop them taking action against the judge. Essentially the system had ground to a halt,” the BHRC report stated.

Prosecutor General Ahmed Muizz however insisted that “it was right that Mr Nasheed should face trial and that even before Mr Nasheed had lost power it was considered the right thing to do.”

“I asked him whether there was a code of practice which governed prosecution decisions. He said that there was but that it was not in the public domain. He said that it was possible for prosecution decisions to take into account the public interest, but was a little vague as to how this was actually done,” the report stated.

“He mentioned that when Mr Nasheed had been president there had been a decision in the public interest not to pursue him in relation to fairly minor electoral offences. He did say that it was possible for the prosecutors to reconsider, following charge, whether a prosecution should continue.”

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

MDP announce resolution for “revolution” to overthrow government

Former President Mohamed Nasheed has today called for a “revolution” to overthrow the administration of President Dr Mohamed Waheed Hassan, claiming it is the only way to have a government that is “by the people”.

The Maldivian Democratic Party’s (MDP) National council passed the motion at Kulhudhuhfushi in Haa Dhaal Atoll, announcing that a five-member “revolution committee” is to now be appointed.

Speaking at the MDP’s National council meeting, Nasheed said: “By taking the initiative to get a people’s government as in the constitution, to have a government that is by the people, the only way is to now bring a revolution. The MDP think like that and I also believe that.”

A statement released by the MDP reveals that the party decided to end the government by “bringing a revolution” after hearing the concerns of the people during the party’s pledge trip.

According to the statement, concerns were raised by Maldivians that Nasheed could be prosecuted for “political reasons” in order to terminate his candidacy, and that the current government may try to sustain their government by using “force” without going to an election.

“This country belongs to its people, and when in Article 4 of the constitution, it says that the power starts from the people. The power rests on the people. And when the coup government does not accept the current government, we MDP agree to end the government by bringing a revolution and forming a government by the people,” the statement reads.

When asked whether he was wary of risking arrested in calling for a “revolution”, Nasheed told Minivan News: “It is very difficult to visualise in the context of a constitution when the transfer of power has been so illegitimate and the consolidation of the coup is also unconstitutional.

“So it has not been very easy to comprehend the actions and omissions in terms of the existing text.”

In response to the MDP’s announcement, President’s Office Spokesperson Masood Imad – speaking in his own personal capacity – labelled the party as “wacko”.

Masood claimed yesterday that Nasheed’s previous comments concerning the MDP’s aim to try and topple the Waheed administration from the streets had been merely an attempt to garner media attention rather than credibly challenge the government.

“Seriously, I don’t think it’s a matter of concern, I would rather not comment on the matter,” he told Minivan News at the time. “This guy is going around saying these things trying to get media attention.”

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Dr Waheed will be PPM presidential candidate, predicts former President Nasheed

President Dr Mohamed Waheed Hassan Manik will become the presidential candidate of the Progressive Party of Maldives (PPM) with the backing of its leader Maumoon Abdul Gayoom, former President Mohamed Nasheed has predicted.

Speaking at a rally in Shaviyani Foakaidhoo on Saturday night during the on-going ‘Journey of Pledges’ northern tour, Nasheed alleged that his former vice president held secret consultations with PPM interim leader and figurehead, former President Gayoom, before the controversial transfer of presidential power on February 7.

“Dr Waheed has been scheming with President Maumoon for about two years, that I know of,” Nasheed said. “Sometimes in an uninhabited island in Baa Atoll, other times in Alivaage [Gayoom’s former residence]. They have been discussing and talking in different places. Anyone who thinks of carrying out a coup d’etat will know that one thing you need for it is a disloyal vice president.”

Nasheed noted that the post of vice president was not included in the old constitution that was twice revised during Gayoom’s 30-year rule.

The Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) presidential candidate reiterated his allegation that Gayoom orchestrated a “coup d’etat through Dr Waheed” on February 7.

A week before Nasheed’s resignation in the wake of riot police assaulting MDP members and ransacking the party’s meeting hall followed by a police mutiny at Republic Square, Dr Waheed met with opposition politicians at his official residence at 1:00am, after which they pledged allegiance to the then-vice president and called on the security forces not to obey then-President Nasheed.

“In my view, Maumoon is trying to make Dr Waheed PPM’s presidential candidate,” Nasheed said on Saturday night.

He added that Gayoom’s intention was to rule by proxy, alluding to a sultan who wielded power through a sibling on the throne while residing in Egypt.

Nasheed suggested that PPM’s presidential primary was being pushed back because PPM parliamentary group leader, presidential hopeful and half-brother of Gayoom, Abdulla Yameen, would not accept Waheed becoming the party’s candidate.

Addressing party members at a rally on Thursday night to celebrate PPM’s first anniversary, Yameen reportedly claimed that PPM was the only party within the ruling coalition that was defending the government and expressed disappointment with the coalition becoming “fractured.”

Nexbis deal

Yameen also called on the government to “immediately” terminate the controversial border control system agreement with Malaysian company Nexbis and contended that the project was detrimental to the state.

The parliament’s minority leader also criticised the government’s hesitancy to cancel the agreement despite the Anti-Corruption Commission’s (AAC’s) findings of alleged corruption in the deal.

Local media meanwhile reported that parliament’s Finance Committee decided during a closed-door session on Thursday to instruct the executive to halt the project. The decision would however have to be approved through a vote on the Majlis floor following consideration of a report by the committee.

In September, the ACC informed the committee that the deal would cost the Maldives MVR 2.5 billion (US$162 million) in potential lost revenue over the lifetime of the contract.

Following its investigation into alleged corruption in awarding of the contract to Nexbis, the ACC requested the Prosecutor General’s Office (PGO) press criminal charges against former Controller of Immigration Ilyas Hussain, brother-in-law of President Waheed.

Almost a year after the case was forwarded to the PGO however, no charges have been pressed against the former immigration chief to date. The ACC alleged that Ilyas Hussain had abused his authority for undue financial gain.

Ilyas – a senior member of Dr Waheed’s Gaumee Ihtihad Party (GIP) – was transferred from the post under President Nasheed when the corruption allegations first surfaced.

His successor Abdulla Shahid expressed concern over both the cost and necessity of the project, calculating that with continued growth in tourist numbers Nexbis would be earning US$200 million in revenue over the 20 year lifespan of the agreement.

Following Dr Waheed’s swearing-in as president on February 7, Ilyas was reappointed controller of immigration. He was however replaced in May with Dr Mohamed Ali and appointed State Minister for Defence.

Former President Nasheed meanwhile alleged in his speech on Saturday that Dr Waheed’s GIP’s Deputy Leader Mohamed ‘Nazaki’ Zaki was complicit in the corrupt dealings in his role as Ambassador to Malaysia.

“Before the [border control] system was established, before there was even a contract in effect, I later heard that equipment was kept in some warehouses in Male’,” he said, claiming that the warehouses were owned by Nazaki Zaki.

Nasheed added that he “agreed completely with Yameen” that the allegations should be investigated.

Delayed congress

Meanwhile, PPM announced in October that its first national congress has been postponed for a third time. The party’s charter however stipulates that a congress must be held within six months of its formation to elect leaders, after which a primary would take place to select a candidate for the upcoming presidential election.

Local daily Haveeru reported a source within the party citing “political turmoil” as the reason for the delay.

The party held its inaugural convention in October 2011.

Meanwhile, in August, Waheed told the Hindu during a visit to Sri Lanka that he was “contemplating” running for office in 2013.

“What I have said is that our administration supports the earliest date for Presidential elections allowed under the Constitution. That in my mind will be July, 2013. I am hoping that the election will be at that time,” he was quoted as saying.

In the same month, former President Gayoom publicly welcomed the prospect of Dr Waheed competing in a primary for the party’s ticket.

In May, PPM Deputy Leader Umar Naseer told local media that Dr Waheed could potentially become the party’s presidential candidate. Naseer however claimed earlier that Waheed would not stand for re-election.

Dr Waheed is currently leader of the GIP, which has no representation in either the People’ Majlis or local councils and just 2,515 registered members, according to the latest figures from the Elections Commission (EC).

By comparison, PPM currently has 17,486 members and is the minority party in parliament. The party has also won nine out of 12 by-elections held since its inception last year.

Speaking at the PPM rally last week, Gayoom urged senior leaders of the party to be mindful of the party’s unity during the upcoming primary. The party’s national congress is now scheduled for January 2013.

NasheedIn his speech, Nasheed meanwhile urged MDP members to begin the presidential campaign with the consideration that PPM’s candidate will be Dr Waheed with Dhivehi Qaumee Party (DQP) Leader Dr Hassan Saeed as his running mate.

“This is how I see the picture,” he said. “I am someone who tries to study how President Maumoon does thing. I don’t believe that things could transpire differently after this.”

Nasheed went on to say that the MDP would “easily” beat Dr Waheed as the PPM’s presidential candidate in 2013.

The former President observed that PPM’s strength was in “small islands” and the “the smaller the island, the more support it has,” which was akin to “a disease” that causes the tormented to defe the tormenter.

However, Nasheed noted that in the local council elections in February 2011, MDP won nine out of 11 seats in the Male’ City Council, all six seats in the Addu City Council and made clean sweeps of a number of larger inhabited islands such as Kulhudhufushi in Haa Dhaal atoll and Thinadhoo in Gaaf Dhaal atoll.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

President Waheed departs for Faafu Nilandhoo

President Dr Mohamed Waheed Hassan Manik and First Lady Ilham Hussain departed for Faafu Atoll Nilandhoo on Friday afternoon.

According to the President’s Office, the President will also visit some islands of Dhaalu Atoll and observe activities carried out during the Eid holidays.

Former President Mohamed Nasheed meanwhile left for Haa Dhaal Kulhudhufushi on Thursday and attended a public feast after Eid prayers yesterday at the largest urban center north of the capital Male’.

Former President Nasheed as well as the Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) Chairperson ‘Reeko’ Moosa Manik on Friday issued greetings and felicitations to all Maldivian citizens on the occasion of the Eid al-Adha.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Former President Nasheed tours Meemu Atoll for by-election campaign

Former President Mohamed Nasheed is currently touring islands of Meemu Atoll to campaign for Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) candidate Ibrahim Latheef in the upcoming by-election on October 29 for the Meemu Mulaku constituency atoll council seat.

Nasheed departed Male’ yesterday following a High Court hearing in the afternoon and spoke at a rally at Mulaku last night.

According to MDP social media updates, the former President visited Meemu Naalafushi and Kolhufushi this morning and received a warm welcome from islanders.

In addition to the Mulaku contest, by-elections will also take place on October 29 for vacant island council seats in Alif Dhaal Dhidhoo, Laamu Maibaidhoo and Faafu Bilehdhoo.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Former President returns to Addu for final leg of campaign trip

Former President Mohamed Nasheed has rejoined his party’s ‘Journey of Pledges’ in the southern atolls following his release from custody on Wednesday.

Prior to his original departure last week on the Maldivian Democratic Party’s (MDP) campaign trip, Nasheed was placed under a travel ban restricting his movements to the capital.

The Department of Judicial Administration have confirmed that Nasheed had requested permission before leaving the Male’ area to rejoin his party. The Foreign Ministry observed in a statement that Nasheed was no longer under a travel ban.

He has since flown south and rejoined his party which is currently in Fuvamulah in Gnaviyani Atoll, continuing its door to door programs and policy workshops in order to gather information ahead of the next election – scheduled for July 2013 at the earliest.

Nasheed had been returned to Male’ on Monday after the Hulhumale’ Magistrates Court ordered the police to produce him at the first hearing in the Judge Abdullah Mohamed detention case on Tuesday.

Nasheed’s lawyers asked the three member panel of judges to give them a time period of 30 days to study the evidence and prepare a defence.

The judges however gave a period of 25 days. They announced that the next hearing would be held on November 4, 2012.

He will fly back to Male’ after the completion of the campaign at the Equatorial Convention Center in Hithadhoo on Saturday October 13 while the rest of the five boat flotilla returns separately.

Information gathering

President of the MDP’s Youth Wing, Shauna Aminath, said that the trip had been extremely useful in gathering specific information on the situation in the atolls.

A similar trip is planned for the northern atolls before the end of the year.

Shauna said that the party had been made aware of the deficiencies in public service provision in a number of areas.

“At almost every island, people have said that since February 7 they have been having problems receiving benefits for single mothers and for those with special needs,” she said.

Shauna also noted a failure to provide consistent public transport as promoted under the Nasheed administration.

“Almost every island said the ferry system had been stopped by non-MDP councils,” said Shauna. “People have grown to appreciate the need for public transport – we found a way around the problems but the people who have the passion and commitment are not there.”

Shauna said that some ferry services were refusing to take small numbers of passengers while others even asked passengers to provide fuel for the service.

She also alleged that the party had gathered information regarding the sacking of MDP supporting government workers since February in what she described as a “witch-hunt”.

The seeming reversal of decentralisation policies observed in the trip – such as those concerning local health workers – was reminiscent of the “old style”  under the 30 year Presidency of Maumoon Abdul Gayoom, said Shauna.

In April the government announced its intention to annul provincial health and utility corporations in an attempt to streamline and improve service delivery.

The Local Government Authority (LGA) has said that it intends to revise the current system of local governance which it has described as prohibitively expensive for the country – which is said to cost US$12 million a year in salaries.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Police issued with arrest warrant for Nasheed

Additional reporting by Mariyath Mohamed

The Hulhumale’ Magistrate Court has issued an order to the Maldives Police Service for the arrest of former President Mohamed Nasheed, asking them to bring him to a court hearing at 4:00PM on Tuesday.

Sub-Inspector Hassan Haneef confirmed that the new warrant gives the police powers of arrest after a previous warrant allowed them only to present the defendant in court with his consent.

The order has been issued in relation to the case of Nasheed’s arrest of Criminal Court Chief Judge Abdulla Mohamed last year.

Punishment for a person guilty of this offence is imprisonment or banishment for three years, or a fine of MVR 2,000 (US$129.70).

Nasheed was initially summoned to the court on October 1. After he failed to attend this hearing, instead heading to the southern atolls to campaign, the court ordered police to present him at the next hearing, scheduled for Sunday October 7.

Nasheed then sent a request to the Hulhumale’ Magistrate Court on Friday asking for the hearing to be rescheduled. The court rejected the appeal, saying that campaigning was not listed as a reason for absence in the legislation regarding summons.

He had planned to return to Male’ on Saturday October 13. No spokesman from the Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) was able to respond to calls at the time of press.

Earlier today, the high court rejected former Nasheed’s appeal challenging the legitimacy of Hulhumale’ Magistrate Court, and its summoning of him in connection with this case.

Former MP and President of MDP Ibrahim ‘Ibra’ Ismail has also cast doubt on the validity of the Hulhumale court’s rulings.

“There is more than ample grounds to contend that the summons was issued by an unlawful panel of judges, sitting in an unlawful court, which had already issued an unconstitutional restraining order which was ultra vires,” said Ibra on his personal blog.

Last week, the MDP vowed to ignore all rulings made by the courts until judicial reforms were introduced.

Nasheed did not return to Male’ for today’s hearing, following which the court issued the current arrest warrant.

The high court has ruled that the order to arrest Nasheed and present him in court on Tuesday cannot be appealed.

An arrest warrant was issued for Nasheed – for unspecified charges –  shortly after his resignation in February although he was never detained by police.

Nasheed was arrested more than twenty times under the regime of 30-year president Maumoon Abdul Gayoom.

Since leaving the President’s Office, Nasheed has maintained that figures loyal to the former regime were behind his ousting, although the Commission of National Inquiry’s (CNI) final report in August found otherwise.

Nasheed is also currently facing civil court proceedings related to the defamation – labelling as traitors – the current minister of defence and police commissioner, both installed immediately following his resignation.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)