Police submit cases to PG alleging damage to Alifushi police station on Feb 8

Police on Monday submitted cases to the Prosecutor General (PG) against 24 individuals charged with damaging the police station on Alifushi in Raa Atoll, and obstructing police work during the February 8 protests.

Police stated that the 24 individuals were charged for forcefully entering the police station around 7.45pm on the night of February 8, threatening officers on duty, forcing them to evacuate the premises, damaging the station building and for obstructing the police service.

The 24 people charged includes 20 men from the island of Alifushi itself. They are: Hassan Ahmed, 30, Velaanaage; Hassan Nashid, 30, Fasaanaa; Nail Abdulla, 25, RoashaneeAage; Muaviyath Abdul Latheef, 30, Scenery; Ahmed Mohamed, 22, Seny; Ismail Saif, 26, HabibiHap, Moosa Niyaz, 27 and Abdulla Niyaz, 24, Snow; Ali Fayaz, 31, Malaaz; Fazal Ibrahim, 19, NightHouse; Abdul Majid Moosa, 33, Hudhuasurumaage; Adam Shareef, 41 and Ibrahim Shareef, 29, VareyVilla; Abdul Hameed, 55, SameeVilla; Yameen Ibrahim, 26, Panama; Ishaq Adam, 28, Moonlight; Faruhadh Mohamed, 33, and Abdul Hafeez Mohamed, 27, HusnooVilla; Ahmed Riyaz, 21, Redfish, Shiyan Ibrahim, 28, Niuma.

The other four men are Mohamed Ramzy, 24, Shifana Villa, Lhaviyani Atoll Lhaimagu; Ahmed Giyas, 26, Berebedhimaage, Lhaviyani Atoll Naifaru; Hassan Simah, 30, Giyarest, Haa Dhaalu Atoll Neykurendhoo and Mohamed Ziyau, 26, of Samantha, Raa Atoll Rasgetheemu.

Police Spokesperson Sub-Inspector Hassan Haneef told Minivan News that police were looking into damage caused to police stations across all areas of the Maldives on February 8. He confirmed that police were not investigating damage caused to the police and MNDF headquarters by police and civilians on February 6-7, stating that “it makes no sense for police to look into this matter ourselves.”

Haneef said instead that the damage would be investigated under procedures determined by the government.

Local news sites have previously reported that in addition to damages to police offices, the state has submitted 409 cases concerning charges of arson on February 8 to the PG.

Meanwhile the Police Integrity Commission in its report into the events of February 6-7 stated that they had found in their investigations that ‘some among the police officers gathered in the Republican Square” had caused damage to the police headquarters, further stating that these would be treated as separate offences.

Minivan News tried contacting President’s Office Media Secretary Masood Imad and the Vice Chair of the Police Integrity Commission, Abdulla Waheed, but neither was responding to calls at the time of press.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

“Prosecution’s only objective to ensure I cannot contest next elections”: former President Nasheed

Former President Mohamed Nasheed in a public speech on Tuesday challenged the Prosecutor General (PG) as to why “such a small charge” was being raised against him while he was being accused of “the much larger crime of having hijacked the entire criminal justice system of the Maldives”.

Following Nasheed’s first hearing in the case against him regarding the arrest of Criminal Court Chief Judge Abdulla Mohamed, the former president addressed a crowd of over 1500 supporters at the Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP)’s rally grounds in ‘Usfasgandu’ on Tuesday night.

Speaking at the rally, Nasheed stated that the Prosecutor General had filed a case against him under Article 81 of the Penal Code for the arrest of a judge.

Article 81 of the Penal Code states that it is a criminal offence for any employee of the state to use the constitutional powers to arrest vested on him to deliberately arrest a person who has not committed a crime. The article further details that the maximum penalty for this offence is either a jail sentence or banishment for a period of up to three years, or a fine of up to MVR 2000 (US$130).

“If, as the President of the Maldives, I arrested the Chief Judge of the Criminal Court, then it is not as small a crime as is stated in Article 81. The Prosecutor General’s only objective is to ensure that I cannot contest in the next presidential elections. To do so, he has identified an article which would provide just the required period of detention to cancel my candidacy,” Nasheed explained.

“In truth, if I have committed the crime he is accusing me of, then it is far more serious than he is currently saying. If such a crime has been committed, then the charges must be for having dismantled the whole criminal justice system.”

“That the PG is not charging me for that, and instead is sticking to such a small charge shows beyond any doubt that he is looking at the matter from a political perspective,” Nasheed alleged.

Nasheed said he was confident that his legal team would prove in court the challenges that the criminal justice system of the country was facing, the problems that the whole justice system of the Maldives was facing, the ensuing risks to national security, and that the steps taken by the President of the Maldives to solve the issue fell within the legislative framework of the country.

“What is the specific moment during the orchestration of the coup that all political actors were noting as most important? The moment when Abdulla Ghazi (Judge Abdulla Mohamed) was released. The coup d’etat that was brought in this country was made possible because our criminal justice system has failed,” said Nasheed.

Nasheed also said that government employees in the southern atolls had raised concerns of not having received their monthly salary.

“Hassan Thaajudeen declared a wage system in the 1600s. Since then, the state has never once failed to pay wages, until now. What we are seeing are the effects of the coup,” Nasheed said.

Regarding the actions of the police, Nasheed stated that there were many police officers who worked with the national interest in mind. He said that these officers were following the orders of their “political leaders” with reluctance.

“The Home Minister may have instructed (police) to shoot me in the head and bring me back. Home Minister may have asked them to bring me with my hands cuffed behind my back. The Home Minister may also have asked them to completely destroy Aslam’s house, or destroy Fares-Mathoda and bring me back. We do not at all doubt that the state has the means and manpower to do so. However, these past few days have made it even clearer to me that there are lots of police and soldiers who are aligned with the national spirit,” Nasheed stated.

Nasheed further stated that the MDP’s campaign trip to the southern atolls, the “Journey of Pledges” had been interrupted by the state with the use of force disproportionate to the situation.

“Some days we fall, but then we get back up even faster,” Nasheed said, stating that the campaign trip would resume on Wednesday morning.

After the first hearing of the case on Tuesday, the court has scheduled the next hearing to be held on November 4. Although Nasheed has been freed from police custody after Tuesday’s hearing, he is still effectively under island arrest.

“We have heard the manifesto of our political opponents. They vow only to detain President Nasheed for a long period of time. There is nothing for the benefit of the people,” Nasheed said.

“Our party’s and my own first pledge is that my name will be on the ballot paper,” Nasheed declared, prompting loud cheers from his supporters.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Prosecutor General receives corruption case involving STO Managing Director

The Anti-Corruption Commission (ACC) has forwarded a case to the Prosecutor General (PG) concerning the case of the Managing Director of the State Trading Organisation (STO) Ali Shahid, reports Sun Online.

It is alleged that Shahid used a corporate credit card inappropriately to pay for the medical treatment of a younger sibling.

The commission, it is reported, noted that the misuse occurred before the STO board stated that cards could be used in personal emergencies.

Shahid is alleged to have defended his use of the card under the STO’s loan provisions for medical treatments although the ACC claim he did not request this loan first.

Last month the ACC sent the PG a case concerning former Chairman of STO Farooq Umar after it was alleged he accepted a $19,000 (MVR292,800) from a Sri Lankan company.

Farooq also stands accused of using an STO corporate credit card for personal items.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

It is not the government that is prosecuting Nasheed: President’s Advisor

Political Advisor to the President, Ahmed ‘Topi’ Thaufeeg, has today said that the government does not have the authority to prosecute former President Mohamed Nasheed.

Thaufeeq told Sun Online that, owing to the separation of powers enshrined in the constitution, only the Prosecutor General (PG) could pursue charges against Nasheed.

However, Thaufeeg told Sun Online that it was the responsibility of the PG to pursue anyone guilty of a crime.

“The government has no influence over this. When the relevant institutions complete their investigations and submit cases to the PG, the PG will file those cases to Court. It does not matter whether it is Nasheed or anyone else,” Thaufeeg is reported to have said.

The response follows the Maldivian Democratic Party’s (MDP) resolution to protest the government over its move to prosecute Nasheed.

After Nasheed yesterday claimed the judiciary was heavily politicised, Thaufeeg told Sun that the institution was strong and was constitutionally protected from political influence.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

MDP requests PG hold prosecution of its members

Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) Chairman ‘Reeko’ Moosa Manik today met with Prosecutor General (PG) Ahmed Muizzu to request that the prosecution of its members arrested on February 7 and 8 be delayed, http://www.haveeru.com.mv/news/44307.

Moosa told the press after his meeting that he had requested the PG await the results of investigations prompted by the recently released Commission of National Inquiry (CNI) before prosecuting the cases of over 200 MDP members.

One of the CNI’s findings was that acts of police brutality had occurred on February 6, 7 and 8 this year. Moosa asked the PG if would wait to first determine if all of his party’s members were arrested within the contours of the law.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Police send case concerning MDP MPs Hamid and Bonday to Prosecutor General

Police have sent cases concerning opposition Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) MPs Hamid Abdul Ghafoor and Ibrahim ‘Bonday’ Rasheed to the Prosecutor General’s Office.

An official from the Prosecutor General’s Office has confirmed to matter to local media today and has said the PG Office was currently researching the case.

Local newspaper ‘Sun Online’ reported that police have requested to press charges against MP Hamid for obstructing police duty and requested MP Rasheed be charged for obstructing police duty, assaulting police officers, threatening and creating unrest.

On August 4, Ibrahim Rasheed was arrested and the Criminal Court placed him under house arrest for five days on charges of threatening and attacking a police officer and obstructing police duty.

According to a statement issued by the MDP, Rasheed was taken into custody at 12.30am from a popular cafe in the capital Male’ by “20 militarised police.”

“MP Ibrahim Rasheed was arrested under a warrant obtained by the police relating to an incident two days back on 30 July when it was reported that the MP was ‘bitten’ on his back by a policeman in the process of being arrested while participating in a protest rally,” the statement said.

Photos surfaced on social media showing bruises on the MPs’ back and the prescription letter from private hospital ADK where he was treated.

On July 22, Hamid Abdul Ghafoor was arrested after he broke through the police barricades near the Maldives Monetary Authority (MMA).

“We warned him and let him go as he first broke through the police barricades. We arrested him for obstruction of police duties after he broke through again,” police said in a statement.

In a statement following Hamid’s arrest, the MDP said Hamid and other protesters were arrested in violation of the laws stipulated under the constitution and international covenants Maldives is party to.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Police send CSC Fahmy’s sexual harassment case to Prosecutor General

Police have concluded their investigation into the alleged sexual harassment of Civil Service Commission (CSC) head Mohamed Fahmy, and have forwarded the case to the Prosecutor General’s Office.

Police Spokesperson Sub-Inspector Hassan Haneef told Minivan News that the case was forwarded to the Prosecutor General yesterday afternoon, after closing the investigation into the case.

Haneef said the police requested the PG press charges against Fahmy.

In June, Parliament’s Independent Institutions Committee launched an investigation into alleged harassment of a female staff member by the CSC Chair after a senior research officer at the CSC accused him of sexually harassing her.

Both Fahmy and the victim were summoned to committee after the complaint was lodged in the first week of June.

Fahmy was alleged to have called the female staff member over to him, taken her hand and asked her to stand in front of him so that others in the office could not see, and caressed her stomach saying ”it won’t do for a beautiful single woman like you to get fat.”

According to local media, the woman told her family about the incident, who then called Fahmy. Fahmy then sent her a text message apologising for the incident, reportedly stating, ”I work very closely with everyone. But I have learned my lesson this time.”

Speaking to Minvian News at the time, Fahmy said the allegation was false “and a blatant lie.”

“The female staff member concerned did not win a scholarship to Singapore, and that is why she is doing this in return,” Fahmy said.

The Independent Institutions Oversight Committee of the parliament concluded an investigation into the case and found Fahmy guilty, and asked him to resign within 14 days.

However Fahmy decided not to resign and the committee opted to forward the case to the parliament floor.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Supreme Court denies giving advice to PG regarding Nasheed’s case

The Supreme Court of the Maldives has denied local media reports suggesting that it issued advice to the Prosecutor General (PG), following his decision to submit former President Mohamed Nasheed’s Criminal case to Hulhumale’ Magistrate Court.

The Supreme Court in an official statement stated it was a responsibility of the Prosecutor General to file criminal charges, but insisted the court did not give any advice regarding Nasheed’s case.

Following investigation by the Human Rights Commission of the Maldives (HRCM), Prosecutor General Ahmed Muizz has filed charges against Nasheed, former Defense Minister Tholhath Ibrahim Kaleyfaanu, former Chief of Defence Force Major General Moosa Ali Jaleel, Brigadier Ibrahim Mohamed Didi and Colonel Mohamed Ziyad for their alleged role in detaining Criminal Court Chief Justice Abdulla Mohamed in January.

Brigadier Ibrahim Mohamed Didi, key figure who defended the Maldives in the coup of 1988, has resigned from the Maldives National Defence Force (MNDF) over the matter.

“I’ve always respected the military uniform during my entire 32 years of service in the military. It’s my belief that I must be present in court after removing the uniform. I do not wish to face the court while wearing this uniform,” Didi was quoted as saying.

An official from the Prosecutor General’s office told local newspaper Haveeru that the decision to submit the case to Hulhumale’ Magistrate Court was because the case involved a Criminal Court Judge, and that there was a conflict of interest were the case were to be held in Criminal Court.

In normal practice, all criminal cases are referred to the Criminal Court of the Maldives, one of five superior courts of the country with High Court and Supreme Court above them in hierarchy.

In an earlier case prior to the arrest of Judge Abdulla in January 2012, concerning harassment the judge, the Prosecutor General stated that the Supreme Court had advised him to submit a criminal case to Hulhumale’ Magistrate Court.

Regarding the charges against Nasheed, neither the Prosecutor General nor the Supreme Court have stated that any advice was given by the Supreme Court – contrary to claims in local media.

A Supreme Court official said he did not wish to speak about the issue, and referred Minivan News to the Department Judicial Administrations (DJA).

However, officials from the DJA told Minvan News that their Spokesperson Latheefa Gasim had not reported to work and therefore could not provide any information.

The Case

Sources linked to the case earlier suggested that the charges levied against Nasheed related to violation of article 46 of the Constitution, particularly violation of Article 12 clause (a) of Judges Act (Act no 13/2010).

Article 44 of the Maldives Constitution states: “No person shall be arrested or detained for an offence unless the arresting officer observes the offence being committed, or has reasonable and probable grounds or evidence to believe the person has committed an offence or is about to commit an offence, or under the authority of an arrest warrant issued by the court.”

Article 12 clause (a) of the Judges Act states that a judge can be arrested without a court warrant, but only if he is found indulging in a criminal act. The same article also states that if a judge comes under suspicion of committing a criminal act or being about to commit a criminal act, they can only be taken into custody with a court warrant obtained from a higher court than that of which the judge presently sits on.  This warrant has to be approved by the prosecutor general.

However the Prosecutor General is now levying charges of breach of article 81 of the Penal Code: “Arresting an innocent person intentionally and unlawfully by a state employee with the legal authority or power vested to him by his position is an offence. Punishment for a person guilty of this offence is imprisonment or banishment for 3 years or a fine of MVR 2000 (US$129.70).”

If Nasheed is found guilty of the charges, his candidacy for a presidential election could be invalidated, depending on the sentence he may receive as per the article 109(f) of the Constitution, which dictates the qualifications of a president.

Article 109(f) of the Constitution states: “[Candidate should] not have been convicted of a criminal offence and sentenced to a term of more than twelve months, unless a period of three years has elapsed since his release, or pardon for the offence for which he was sentenced;”

Detention of Judge Abdulla

The Chief Judge was detained by the military, after he had opened the court outside normal hours to order the immediate release of former Justice Minister and current Home Minister, Deputy leader of the Dhivehi Quamee Party (DQP) Dr Mohamed Jameel.

Jameel had been arrested on successive occasions for allegedly inciting religious hatred, after he published a pamphlet claiming that the government was working under the influence of “Jews and Christian priests” to weaken Islam in the Maldives. The President’s Office called for an investigation into the allegations, and requested Jameel provide evidence to back his claims.

In late 2011 Judge Abdulla was himself under investigation by the judicial watchdog for politically bias comments made to private broadcaster DhiTV.

The Judicial Services Commission (JSC) was due to release a report into Judge Abdulla’s ethical misconduct; however the judge approached the Civil Court and successfully filed an injunction against his further investigation by the judicial watchdog.

Judge Abdulla’s arrest sparked three weeks of anti-government protests starting in January, while the government appealed for assistance from the Commonwealth and UN to reform the judiciary.

As Judge Abdulla continued to be held, Prosecutor General (PG) Ahmed Muizz later joined the High Court and Supreme Court in condemning the MNDF’s role in the arrest, requesting that the judge be released.

The police are required to go through the PG’s Office to obtain an arrest warrant from the High Court, the PG said at the time, claiming the MNDF and Nasheed’s administration “haven’t followed the procedures, and the authorities are in breach of the law. They could be charged with contempt of court.”

He then ordered the Human Rights Commission of the Maldives (HRCM) to investigate the matter.

As protests escalated, elements of the police and military mutinied on February 7, alleging that Nasheed had given them “unlawful orders”.

Nasheed publicly resigned the same day, but later said he was forced to do so “under duress” in a coup d’état. Nasheed’s MDP have taken to the streets in the months since, calling for an early election.

Judge Abdulla was released on the evening of Nasheed’s resignation, and the Criminal Court swiftly issued a warrant for Nasheed’s arrest. Police did not act on the warrant, after international concern quickly mounted

Spokesperson of the Department of Judicial Administration, Latheefa Gasim, yesterday told local media that Hulhumale’ Magistrate Court has accepted the case and the hearings will be held after the first 10 days of Ramadan.

She also said that the Magistrate Court had space limitations and therefore they have been talking to the Housing Development Corporation (HDC) located in Hulhimale about holding the hearings in the reception hall of the HDC office.

“We have been negotiating with HDC to see if they could give us their reception hall to hold the hearings. After the HDC response, we will decide on a date to hold the hearings,” she said at the time.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

“Don’t withdraw the charges – I will not back down from this case,” Nasheed vows, as PG files charges for judge’s arrest

Ousted President Mohamed Nasheed last night responded to criminal charges pressed against him by the Prosecutor General (PG), for the arrest of Chief Judge of Criminal Court Abdulla Mohamed in the closing days of his presidency.

Speaking to his supporters at the Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) protest camp Usfasgandu, Nasheed stated that he is “very prepared” to justify the reasons for the arrest of Judge Abdulla, and said he was ready to appear in court and prove his actions were valid.

“Even if [the court] asks me to be present tomorrow, I would be present. The court has to be place where justice should be served. The trial system has to be reformed to ensure that it provides justice,” he said.

Nasheed claimed that his political opponents were of the belief that “destroying” him through the court would “kill” the ideology of the MDP, but challenged that this would never happen in the country.

“You can torture me. You can chain me to a chair. You can put me in solitary confinement. You can isolate me from my family. You can harass me and torture me. You can destroy me through the court. But tell you what: you can never kill the ideology of the Maldivian Democratic Party in this country anymore,” he said, as supporters roared in support.

The ousted president stated that the MDP had sought to reform the country, and that these reforms had been steadily carried out.

He further stated that he was steadfast and confident he could “stand up in the courts of law” and prove that his actions reflected the nation’s best interests.

He also emphasised that he did not wish to see the charges now presented against him withdrawn for any reason.

“I, as the president of this country and as the presidential nominee of the MDP, worked for the benefit of the Maldivian people, for their wellbeing and to fulfill the needs of the people of the Maldives. I have not done anything to further my own interests during my tenure as president,” Nasheed said.

Nasheed also dismissed the accusation made by the High Court, Supreme Court and the Prosecutor General (PG) that he had ordered the military to arrest Judge Abdulla unlawfully.

“I did nothing unlawful during my tenure,” he challenged.

He also called on the population to be present at his trial and witness what happened in the court, alleging that the whole case was politically motivated and that his opponents were seeking to gain an unfair upper hand from the “political scandal”.

“This case is a case that I wanted to see coming. This is a case that I want to face myself. I will not back down from this case,” he said.

Nasheed also added that the charges will not keep him from engaging in the All Party Talks, and said that he would be present.

“Even if they imprison me, I am willing to take part in the talks even while in prison. They will never be able to defeat us,” he said.

Nasheed also maintained that an early election will take place by the end of this year.

“We will continue our peaceful protests. Day by day the protests will increase and intensify,” he said.

“We will not give up. Our determination will not weaken. By the will of god, we will bring the good governance that the people of this country want.”

The controversial detention of Judge Abdulla

The Chief Judge was detained by the military, after he had opened the court outside normal hours to order the immediate release of former Justice Minister and current Home Minister and deputy leader of the Dhivehi Quamee Party (DQP), Dr Mohamed Jameel.

Jameel had been arrested on successive occasions for allegedly inciting religious hatred, after he published a pamphlet claiming that the government was working under the influence of “Jews and Christian priests” to weaken Islam in the Maldives. The President’s Office called for an investigation into the allegations, and requested Jameel provide evidence to back his claims.

In late 2011 Judge Abdulla was himself under investigation by the judicial watchdog for politically bias comments made to private broadcaster DhiTV. The Judicial Services Commission (JSC) was due to release a report into Judge Abdulla’s ethical misconduct, however the judge approached the Civil Court and successfully filed an injunction against his further investigation by the judicial watchdog.

Judge Abdulla’s arrest sparked three weeks of anti-government protests starting in January, while the government appealed for assistance from the Commonwealth and UN to reform the judiciary.

As Judge Abdulla continued to be held, Prosecutor General (PG) Ahmed Muizz later joined the High Court and Supreme Court in condemning the MNDF’s role in the arrest, requesting that the judge be released.

The police are required to go through the PG’s Office to obtain an arrest warrant from the High Court, the PG said at the time, claiming the MNDF and Nasheed’s administration “haven’t followed the procedures, and the authorities are in breach of the law. They could be charged with contempt of court.”

He then ordered the Human Rights Commission of the Maldives (HRCM) to investigate the matter.

As protests escalated, elements of the police and military mutinied on February 7, alleging that Nasheed had given them “unlawful orders”.

Nasheed publicly resigned the same day, but later said he was forced to do so “under duress” in a coup d’état. Nasheed’s MDP have taken to the streets in the months since, calling for an early election.

Judge Abdulla was released on the evening of Nasheed’s resignation, and the Criminal Court swiftly issued a warrant for Nasheed’s arrest. Police did not act on the warrant, after international concern quickly mounted.

Investigation

Nasheed became the first president to be summoned before the Human Rights Commission of the Maldives (HRCM) when he was asked to testify regarding his role in the arrest of Judge Abdulla in April. Nasheed used his testimony to claim that he had been informed at the time by the Home Ministry that the judge allegedly posed a “national threat” – prompting his eventual detention.

The former president additionally claimed that the Home Ministry had communicated with the Defence Ministry on the situation, which in turn led to the decision to arrest the judge after watchdog bodies like the Judicial Service Commission (JSC) had raised alleged concerns over his ethical conduct.

“I was told that Abdulla Mohamed would not comply with the police’s summons to investigate allegations [against him],” Nasheed later stated at a press conference following the meeting with the HRCM.

“The Home Minister wrote to the Defense Minister that Abdulla Mohamed’s presence in the courts was a threat to national security. And to take necessary steps. And that step, the isolation of Abdulla Mohamed, was what the [Defense] Ministry deemed necessary.”

The HRCM after concluding the investigation sent the case to the prosecutor general.

A second case involving Nasheed has also been sent to the prosecutor general by the police, that involved the confiscation of bottles of alcohol allegedly found at his residence shortly after his presidency ended.

Charges

PG Muizz on July 15 filed charges against former President Mohamed Nasheed and the former Defense Minister Tholhath Ibrahim Kaleyfaanu for their alleged role in detaining Criminal Court Chief Justice Abdulla Mohamed in January.

Nasheed and Tholhath stand charged with violation of the Article 81 of the Penal Code, which states that the detention of a government employee who has not been found guilty of a crime is illegal. If found guilty, Nasheed and Tholhath will face a jail sentence or banishment for three years or a Rf 3000 fine (US$193.5).

The case was filed at the Hulhumalé Magistrate Court. In a statement today, Muizz said he intended to levy the same charges against former Chief of Defense Forces Moosa Ali Jaleel, Brigadier-General Ibrahim Mohamed Didi and Colonel Mohamed Ziyad.

Home Minister Mohamed Jameel in a post on social media Twitter has said the “historic criminal trial” is the “first step towards the national healing process.”

Meanwhile, Spokesperson of the Department of Judicial Administration,Latheefa Gasim, told local media that Hulhumale’ Magistrate Court has accepted the case and the hearings will be held after the first 10 days of Ramadan.

She also said that the magistrate court had space limitations and therefore they have been talking to the Housing Development Corporation (HDC) located in Hulhimale about holding the hearings in the reception hall of the HDC office.

“We have been negotiating with HDC to see if they could give us their reception hall to hold the hearings. After what HDC says, we will decide on a date to hold the hearings,” she said.

President Dr Mohamed Waheed Hassan’s spokesperson Abbas Adil Riza told Minivan News at the time that the president will not “interfere with the independent Prosecutor General’s decisions.”

In April, Nasheed told the UK’s Guardian newspaper that he did not want to arrest a judge, but he “just couldn’t let him [Abdulla Mohamed] sit on the bench.”

“There is a huge lack of confidence in the judiciary, and I had to do something, and the constitution called upon me to do that. It’s not a nice thing to do. And it’s not a thing that I would want to do. And it’s not a thing that I liked doing. But it had to be done,” he added.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)