Tag: protest

Protesters calling for religious tolerance attacked with stones, threatened with death

Police are investigating a violent attack on a ‘silent protest’ calling for religious tolerance, held at the Artificial Beach to mark Human Rights Day.

Witnesses said a group of men threw rocks at the 15-30 demonstrators, calling out threats and vowing to kill them.

One witness who took photos of the attacked said he was “threatened with death if these pictures were leaked. He said we should never been seen in the streets or we will be sorry.”

Among those injured in the attack was Ismail ‘Khilath’ Rasheed, a controverisal blogger whose website was recently blocked by the Communications Authority of the Maldives (CAM) on the order of the Ministry of Islamic Affairs.

Rasheed suffered a head injury and was rushed to Indira Gandhi Memorial Hospital (IGMH).

“They started hitting us with bricks. They were aiming at our heads – we could tell they were serious and wanted to kill us,” Rasheed told Minivan News from hospital. “I was taken on a motorcycle to IGMH, but I could see them behind me still hitting my friends.”

Police Sub-Inspector Ahmed Shiyam said police attended the scene after the attackers had departed, and were currently investigating the cause of the violence. No arrests had yet been made, he added.

The protesters, calling themselves ‘Silent Solidarity’, had earlier issued a press release stating that their intention was to “make the Maldives and the international community aware of the rising religious intolerance in the Maldives, and to condemn the Constitutionally endorsed suppression of religious freedom. We also denounce the increasing use being made of Islam as a tool of political power.”

“Silent Solidarity will be protesting against discrimination of all races, gender, sexual preferences and religious beliefs and supporting freedom of thought and expression. In our silence, we speak volumes,” the group’s statement said.

The Maldives has come under increasing international scrutiny following an apparent rise in religious intolerance.

Several monuments gifted to the Maldives by other SAARC countries during the recent summit in Addu have been defaced or stolen on the grounds that they are idolatrous. Islamic Minister Dr Abdul Majeed Abdul Bari has condemned the monuments while the opposition has hailed the vandals as “national heroes”.

Protests also erupted last month after UN High Commissioner for Human Rights Navi Pillay spoke in parliament calling for the government and the judiciary to issue a moratorium and debate on flogging as a punishment for extra-marital sex.

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

“The issue needs to be examined, and therefore I called for a countrywide discussion. It is much better if the issue is transparent and debated.”

Pillay also stated that requirement under the Maldivian constitution that all Maldivians be Muslim ”is discriminatory, and does not comply with international standards. I would urge a debate again on the issue to open up entrance of the constitution to all.”

Challenged by a local journalist that the Maldives was both obliged to protect the religion of Islam, she replied: “You have a constitution which conforms in many respects to universal human rights. Let me assure you that these human rights conform with Islam.”

She added that the Maldives had signed international treaties that are legally-binding obligations, “and such a practice conflicts with these obligations undertaken by the Maldives.”

The following day protesters gathered outside the UN building, carrying placards stating “Islam is not a toy”, “Ban UN” and “Flog Pillay”, and called on authorities to arrest the UN High Commissioner.

MPs roundly condemned Pillay’s statements.

‘”What we should be worried about holding discussions against the fundamentals of Islam in a 100 percent Muslim country such as the Maldives is that we may start questioning about worshipping God Almighty tomorrow,” said opposition Dhivehi Rayyithunge Party (DRP) MP Dr Afrashim Ali.

Ruling Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) MP Mohamed ‘Colonel’ Nasheed said the Maldives “will never ever open doors for religions other than Islam in the Maldives. We’ll not give the opportunity to speak against the fundamentals and principles of Islam in the parliament.”

MP Riyaz Rasheed, from the opposition-aligen Dhivehi Qaumee Party (DQP) condemned the Speaker Abdulla Shahid from allowing Pillay to complete her address.

“There is a good chance for us to directly say that Abdulla Shahid has made a good deal with this government to wipe out the religion of Islam from this country,” MP Rasheed said.

President Mohamed Nasheed has meanwhile said that Maldivians “should have the self-belief and resolve not to have our faith shaken by listening to statements or opinions expressed by others.”

“That the punishments and rulings of Islamic Sharia are not inhumane is very clear to us,” Nasheed said. “We have the opportunity to show the whole world how noble and civilised Sharia is. That is because we are the only Islamic nation with a democratically-elected government.

“Wasting that opportunity in a Jihadi spirit” with the claim of “defending Islam” was unacceptable, Nasheed said. “Opposition parties will always attack us by using religion as a weapon. [But] I believe that this country is the only Islamic nation where Islamic Sharia has been practiced uninterrupted for 700 years.”

Religious sentiment in the Maldives can often be vocal and heated, but has rarely led to physical violence.

In late May 2010, well-known Islamic preacher Dr Zakir Naik visited the Maldives and delivered a sermon in the capital Male’. During a question-and-answer session 37 year-old Mohamed Nazim stood up and declared himself “Maldivian and not a Muslim”.

Nazim’s declaration angered the 11,000 strong crowd, and he was escorted from the venue by police and officials from the Ministry of Islamic Affairs amid calls for his execution.

After two days of religious counselling in police custody, Nazim appeared before television cameras at an Islamic Ministry press conference and gave Shahada – the Muslim testimony of belief – and apologised for causing “agony for the Maldivian people” and requested that the community accept him back into society.

In July 2010, 25 year-old air traffic controller Ismail Mohamed Didi was found hanged from the control tower of Male’ International Airport in an apparent suicide, after seeking asylum in the UK for fear of persecution over his stated lack of religious belief.

“Maldivians are proud of their religious homogeneity and I am learning the hard way that there is no place for non-Muslim Maldivians in this society,” Didi wrote in a letter to an international humanitarian organisation, prior to his death.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

PPM to protest for ‘protection’ of judiciary

Weeks after the  ruling Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) said it would protest over the political compromising of judicial independence by members of the former government, former President Maumoon Abdul Gayoom’s Progressive Party of Maldives (PPM) has said it protest “to protect” the judiciary.

PPM Council member Ahmed Saleem today told Minivan News that the PPM’s decision came following attempts made by the current government “to influence the judiciary.”

”The government recently has clearly said that they will not allow any trial to be conducted if it is not going the way they want,” Saleem alleged. ”There are many persons who have been sued in the current government and they do not want their cases to be trialed, that is the reason why they are trying to influence the judiciary.”

Saleem said PPM had decided “to be on standby” to come out and protest, although the party had not decided any on specific time or date.

”A case concerning a Criminal Court Judge is currently in the Judicial Service Commission (JSC) and the government is attempting to influence it as well,” he claimed. ”We will not let it happen.”

Recently the JSC completed its investigation into the alleged misconduct of Chief Criminal Court Judge Abdulla Mohamed.

The case against Abdulla Mohamed was presented to the JSC in January 2010 by former President’s member of the JSC, Aishath Velezinee, after Abdulla Mohamed appeared on private TV station DhiTV and expressed “biased political views”.

In 2005, then Attorney General Dr Hassan Saeed forwarded to the President’s Office concerns about the conduct of Abdulla Mohamed after he requested that an underage victim of sexual abuse reenact her abuse for the court.

In 2009 following the election of the current government, those documents were sent to the JSC.

Last week MDP Chairperson and MP ‘Reeko’ Moosa Manik and other senior officials including former President of the party Ibrahim Ismail ‘Ibra’ held a press conference where Moosa said that no rulings made by Abdulla Mohamed should be implemented.

Speaking during the press conference, Ibra said that there were many cases pending in the JSC against Abdulla Mohamed, and that this was the first such case to be concluded.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

AG appeals Criminal Court ruling on arrest of Gassan Maumoon

The Attorney General’s (AG) Office has appealed the Criminal Court’s ruling that the arrest of Gassan Maumoon was unconstitutional.

The AG’s Office told local media that it appealed because the court’s ruling contained “legal issues” and was delivered in a case that the police had not filed.

Gassan Maumoon, son of former president Maumoon Abdul Gayoom, was arrested on Monday, October 23 for allegedly throwing a wooden plank that struck and critically injured a 17-year-old boy during a protest outside of the family’s household, Endherimaage.

The protest was held by the ruling Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) on October 20. Gassan was subsequently summoned twice by police, and later taken to Dhoonidhoo prison for further enquiry.

The Criminal Court however released Gassan under the claim that his arrest violated procedures established by the Supreme Court for operating article 46 of the constitution.

The ruling came after Gassan’s lawyers applied for a writ of ‘habeas corpus’, or release from unlawful detention. They argued that due process was violated as the circumstances of his arrest did not fall under exceptions provided for in the constitution where police could arrest suspects without an arrest warrant.

Article 46 states that, “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.”

President’s Office Press Secretary Mohamed Zuhair added that the court had cited a precedent set by the Supreme Court on a similar case, stating that a suspect should be arrested at the scene of the crime. Otherwise, said Zuhair, a suspect should be arrested at the scene where evidence is found.

Zuhair observed that the court’s policy on article 46 restricts the due course of justice.

“The police had investigated the case and detained Gassan when they thought they had enough evidence. They submitted the evidence to the court and followed the procedures in place. What other procedures should they use, especially in a time-sensitive case such as a case of violence?” he said.

Zuhair added that if the court’s claim against the police’s arrest procedures went undisputed, all individuals arrested during the protest would have to be released.

Police Superintendent Mohamed Jinah insisted at the time of the court’s ruling that the arrest was lawful as police had reasonable grounds to suspect Gassan had committed a crime and were prepared to submit early evidence.

If Gassan’s arrest was unlawful, said Jinah, “everyone police have arrested and brought before the court [for extension of detention] was arrested in violation of the constitution.”

On October 26, police released 11 suspects who had been arrested without a warrant on suspicion of having committed an offence.

When asked if the appeal was expected to overturn the court’s ruling against the police. Zuhair was optimistic.

There are two key points of argument, he said. “How was a private member of Gayoom’s family able to launch a case in the Criminal Court without first going through the Civil Court, as is the usual course of action, and secondly, how else were the police supposed to submit their evidence, other than the procedure in place, which they used?”

Gassan’s case involves another first: after the police were allegedly summoned to and “thrown out” of the Prosecutor General’s (PG) office, the PG publicly stated that it was seeking legal advice from the Supreme Court. “This is unprecedented, usually these cases are appealed to the High Court,” Zuhair said.

“I hope this is resolved quickly because there is a growing concern among a wide section of society over the impartiality of the judiciary,” he concluded.

Recently, MDP requested international assistance in overcoming the “increasingly blatant collusion between politicians loyal to the former autocratic President, Maumoon Abdul Gayoom, and senior members of the judiciary.”

The request was made in relation to a Supreme Court case in which Gassan has contested MP Mohamed Musthafa’s election to parliament in May 2009.

“The Supreme Court case is the latest installment of an ongoing attempt by Gayoom to secure a parliamentary seat for his son, Gassan Maumoon,” a statement sent by MDP and subsequently forwarded to diplomatic missions and United Nations offices by the Foreign Ministry alleged.

Recent actions in the judicial system have indicated a deep and tangled history of politically biased judicial rulings.

The Judicial Services Commission (JSC), the watchdog body charged with overseeing the judiciary, abolished its Complaints Committee citing “efficiency”, with complaints against judges subsequently forwarded for review by the legal section and Chair Adam Mohamed Abdulla, a Supreme Court Justice.

Last year the JSC received 143 complaints concerning the conduct of judges. By its own statistics none were tabled in the commission, and only five were ever replied to.

Chair of the former complaints commission, Aishath Velezinee, was meanwhile stabbed in the street in January this year.

The JSC also failed to table or even acknowledge receipt of a report on the judiciary produced by the International Commission of Jurists (ICJ), which questioned whether the JSC possessed the technical ability and knowledge to investigate complaints and hold the judiciary accountable, as well as its independence.

In the wake of these developments, Zuhair said lawyers have begun forums to openly discuss allegations against the judicial system. “They are active and getting a fair amount of media coverage, I think they may formulate reforms for two laws concerning judges and the judiciary,” he said.

The laws involve the process of appointing judges to the Supreme Court, and the qualifications required of a Supreme Court judge.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

PG asks police to provide details of protest response

The Prosecutor General’s (PG) office has asked the police to provide details of its response to the protest held by ruling Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) outside the Supreme Court on Thursday, which later spread to the residence of the former President.

Prosecutor General Ahmed Muiz told Minivan he was unable to comment on the matter at this time.

However Police Sub-Inspector Ahmed Shiyam said this was the first time the PG had made such a request.

“They are requesting details of what happened,” Shiyam confirmed, but said the PG had not notified police of a potential course of action or what it was looking for.

Shiyam pointed out that demonstrations in certain areas, including courts and army gates, are prohibited by the Regulation on Assembly.

“Members of the Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) and Dhivehi Rayithunge Party (DRP) have both gathered in these areas though, even though we have requested them not to. Some of them have gone to the army gates and the President’s gate as well, so occasionally we have to address the issue,” he said.

The police have been asked to provide the information before Wednesday this week.

On Thursday October 20 the MDP national council conducted an emergency meeting and approved a resolution to launch a protest against the judiciary, claiming judges were unduly influenced by the former President and his half-brother MP Abdulla Yameen.

The protesters gathered at the Supreme Court before marching towards the former President’s building Endherimaage, where violent clashes erupted between MDP activists and a few Gayoom supporters blocking the entrance to his residence.

Minivan News journalists at the scene also observed gravel, rocks, hot water and sharp metal raining down on protesters from the top floors or terrace of Endherimaage.

Several activists claimed they saw Gassan Maumoon, former President Gayoom’s son, throw stones and pour boiling hot water on the protesters. MDP activists meanwhile threw large stones at Endhirmaage and attempted to break down the door. Some windows of the house were smashed while a car parked outside was damaged.

A 17-year-old, identified as Hussein Hassan, was rushed to the Indira Gandhi Memorial Hospital (IGMH) with critical injuries after a block of wood apparently thrown from the building hit his head. IGMH later confirmed that the boy was conscious and his condition stable.

Police summoned Gassan Maumoon, son of the former President, for questioning on Saturday after a number of MDP members alleged they had seen him throw the block of wood from the balcony. Police subsequently arrested Gassan and took him to the prison island of Dhoonidhoo, and presented him at court this afternoon. The hearing is currently ongoing.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

MDP protest turns violent outside Gayoom’s residence

A protest launched by the ruling Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) turned violent today after party activists clashed with supporters of former President Maumoon Abdul Gayoom in front of his residence Enderimaage, in the Maafanu ward of Male’.

MDP MPs and activists gathered outside the Supreme Court at 3pm this afternoon in anticipation of a verdict in a case filed by Umar Naseer – an interim council member of Gayoom’s Progressive Party of Maldives (PPM) – challenging the legitimacy of Thimarafushi MP Mohamed Musthafa’s candidacy on the grounds that he had a decreed debt.

Earlier in the day, the MDP national council conducted an emergency meeting and approved a resolution to launch a protest against the judiciary, claiming judges were unduly influenced by the former President and his half-brother MP Abdulla Yameen.

However a verdict was not delivered by the Supreme Court today, which said the hearing was called “to clarify a few points after reviewing the case.”

After Musthafa emerged from the hearing, the protesters marched towards Endherimaage, where violent clashes erupted between MDP activists and a few Gayoom supporters blocking the entrance to his residence.

The clashes occurred after a large piece of wood allegedly thrown from Endherimaage struck a 17-year-old demonstrator or bystander, who was immediately rushed to hospital on a passing pick-up.

Minivan News journalists at the scene observed gravel, rocks, hot water and sharp metal raining down on protesters from the top floors or terrace of Endherimaage.

Several activists claimed they saw Gassan Maumoon, former President Gayoom’s son, throw stones and pour boiling hot water on the protesters.

MDP activists meanwhile threw large stones at Endhirmaage and attempted to break down the door.

Some windows of the house were smashed while a car parked outside was damaged.

The 17-year-old is currently undergoing surgery at the Intensive Care Unit (ICU) at the Indira Gandhi Memorial Hospital (IGMH). A number of MDP MPs and senior members are waiting at the hospital.

MP Ali Waheed told state broadcaster MNBC that the boy was behind MP Alhan Fahmy when the piece of wood struck him straight on the head.

MNBC One showed blood stains on the MPs’ shirt, which Ali Waheed said resulted from the injury to the boy. The state broadcaster also reported that other people at the area were hurt from falling objects.

Speaking to Minivan News outside IGMH, the brother of the injured boy said that according to doctors “his skull was damaged and parts of the skull have gone inside his brain.”

“He was hit in the right side of his head and the left side of his body is now paralysed,” the relative said.

Doctors could not predict how long the surgery would take, he added.

”The doctors said the surgery was to remove the particles from inside his brain,” he said.

Some of the MDP supporters outside the hospital claimed the boy was hit by a wooden door hurled from the terrace of Endherimaage by Gassan Maumoom.

Police spokesman Sub-Inspector Ahmed Shiyam confirmed to Minivan News that police were investigating reports that the object was thrown from the Endherimaage building.

“We are questioning the witnesses to try and determine how this happened,” Shiyam said.

“This is a very serious issue. Because of this there might be other problems and we do not want there to be political violence.”

Meanwhile in an interview with private broadcaster DhiTV this evening, Gayoom condemned the protest and claimed the violence was organised by the government.

Gayoom said he saw senior MDP members such as Male’ City Mayor ‘Maizan’ Ali Manik and Executive Services Secretary at the President’s Office Mohamed Ziyad. Minivan News also observed Ziyad and Maizan Alibe at the protest.

“They came with their activists and attacked my home,” Gayoom said. “They attacked nearby houses as well.”

As riot police were not at the scene to intercede, said Gayoom, Chief of Defence Forces Moosa Jaleel and Police Commissioner Ahmed Faseeh should “personally bear responsibility” for the damage.

Gayoom said he would inform foreign governments of today’s events.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

MDP calls for nationwide protest against judiciary

The ruling Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) has held an emergency meeting and called for a nationwide protest against the country’s judiciary, starting at 3:30pm.

The party contends that the courts have been  prioritising cases filed against MDP members and delaying cases involving opposition figures. The protest coincides with the Supreme Court’s scheduled delivery of a verdict in a case filed against MDP MP Mohamed Musthafa, requesting his candidacy as an MP be invalidated.

The case against him was filed in July 2009 by then leader of the Islamic Democratic Party (IDP) Umar Naseer, shortly after Musthafa won the election for Thimarafushi constituency against former President Maumoon Abdul Gayoom’s son, Gassan Maumoon. Umar Naseer contended that Musthafa had a decreed debt dating back to 1997 that was not paid in accordance with a court ruling.

Today’s protest was proposed to the party’s National Council by MDP MP Mariya Ahmed, the party’s former chairperson.

MP and spokesperson for the party’s Parliamentary Group, Mohamed Shifaz, told Minivan News that the protest would start at the MDP’s Head Office and assemble near properties belonging to the judicial system.

Shifaz said there had been cases filed against opposition figures “held up in the courts for years.”

”Hearings in the corruption case against People’s Alliance MP and Deputy Speaker of parliament Ahmed Nazim were closed to journalists and the public, and the court has delaying the trial,” he claimed. ”But if this was a case against an MDP member they would hasten their work to conclude the case and sentence him.”

Shifaz said one of the most important thing MDP members “have always wanted was justice.”

”The judges are still trapped under the influence of [former President] Maumoon Abdul Gayoom, his half-brother Abdulla Yameen and the like,” Shifaz said, adding that there were cases against Gayoom and Yameen filed in the court by the Presidential Commission that had never come to trial.

The Judicial Services Commission (JSC), the watchdog body charged with overseeing the judiciary, in May this year abolished its Complaints Committee citing “efficiency”, with complaints against judges subsequently forwarded for review by the legal section and Commission head Adam Mohamed, a Supreme Court Judge.

Last year the JSC received 143 complaints concerning the conduct of judges. By its own statistics none were tabled in the commission, and only five were ever replied to. Chair of the former complaints commission, Aishath Velezinee, was meanwhile stabbed in the street in January this year.

The JSC also failed to table or even acknowledge receipt of a report on the judiciary produced by the International Commission of Jurists (ICJ), which questioned whether the JSC’s possessed the technical ability and knowledge to investigate complaints and hold the judiciary accountable, as well as its independence.

Shifaz today alleged that judges had been “blackmailed by the opposition”, and said that all the MDP MPs and senior officials, along with many supporters and citizens, would join the protest today.

”We have not really decided when to stop the protest. Members of the council have suggested continuing it until we achieve justice,” he said.

Former member of the Special Majlis Drafting Committee for the new Constitution, Ibrahim ‘Ibra’ Ismail, recently filed a defamation case against the Supreme Court after it reprimanded him for calling on the public to “rise up and sort out the judges”.

In response to Ibra’s calls, the Supreme Court and the Judicial Services Commission (JSC) demanded authorities investigate the former MP, claiming that “making such statements in a free, democratic society under lawful governance goes against the principles of civilisation”.

The Supreme Court subsequently issued a writ of prohibition and took over the case against it over from the Civil Court, and as a result, Ibra said, “I now have to go before the Supreme Court and say to them ‘You have defamed me, now please decide in my favour.’”

Speaking to Minivan News today, Ibra speculated that one possible reason for the Supreme Court’s decision to suddenly pursue the case against MP Mustafa “is because Gayoom’s new Progressive Party of the Maldives (PPM) wants to win the seat in a by-election.”

“Mustafa contested the seat against Gassan Maumoon, Gayoom’s son, and won by just a few votes,” Ibra noted. “They have high hopes for the seat.”

He also speculated that the Supreme Court’s actions could be an effort to divert attention from the public forum on judicial issues being held at the Social Centre in Male’ tonight at 8:30pm, “a red herring to divert public focus. [The forum] is where things will really happen.”

Regardless of its motivation, Ibra said, the Supreme Court’s behaviour “is all but an admission that they are operating on a political platform.”

Asked whether he was participating in the protest planned by the MDP against the judiciary, Ibra said he had “no idea what they’re up to. I surmise they are showing support for MP Mustafa. I am deliberately staying away from the political players on this issue. I want the civil community to come out on this, but I suspect senior political figures will now want to start making an appearance on the judicial issue.”

DRP Deputy Leader Ahmed Mohamed today told Minivan News that protesting against the courts and the judicial system was “unacceptable”.

”It should not be done. In the past MDP has done similiar things – once they locked the Supreme Court and Judicial Service Commission (JSC), and established a court of their own,” Mohamed contended. ”These kind of actions are clearly against the constitution.”

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Kulhudhufushi islanders protest plans to sell reclaimed land

A group of islanders on Kulhudhufushi in Haa Dhaal Atoll gathered outside the island council office this morning to protest plans to sell plots of land from the reclaimed area of the island.

The protest was organised in response to the Kulhudhufushi Development Corporation putting up 20 plots of reclaimed land for sale through a bidding process. Plots measuring 1,000 square feet were to be sold at a rate of Rf300 per square foot.

Speaking to Minivan News, Ibrahim Ahmed, 43, a resident of Kulhudhufushi who participated in the protest said that islanders gathered outside the council office at 8:00am this morning and were met with police officers in riot gear.

“We prepared a petition or a letter expressing our concerns with the plans to sell land and were going to submit it to the chair of the island council,” he explained.

The gathering was peaceful until two protesters attempted to enter the council office, he continued, alleging that police used force and pepper spray to disperse the crowd.

“They used pepper spray without any warning and took away people in handcuffs,” he claimed, adding that police used disproportionate force against the protesters.

“It was a completely peaceful gathering before that,” he added. “But that was how it turned into a protest.”

The islanders then met with Council Chair Jamsheed Mohamed, who asked for a three-day period to discuss with the relevant government ministries.

The ruling Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) made a clean sweep of the seven-member Kulhudhufushi island council. The island is the largest population hub north of Male’.

Ibrahim said the MDP councillor assured the protestors in writing that the council would seek to find a solution in the next three days.

The Kulhudhufushi resident explained that the main concern of the protesters was the decision to register the reclaimed plots under the Kulhudhufushi Development Corporation.

“We want that land to be registered under the council,” he said. “We don’t mind if it leased for 99 years, but selling the plots is completely unacceptable to the people of this island.”

Islanders were not consulted before the land use plan for the reclaimed area was drawn up, Ibrahim said, adding that the people of Kulhudhufushi would prefer the area to be used for industrial or business purposes.

Meanwhile, opposition Dhivehi Rayyithunge Party (DRP) MP Dr Abdulla Mausoom, the party’s deputy parliamentary group leader, held a press conference this afternoon and called on the government to “not test the people to see how much their blood will boil.”

The protest in Kulhudhufushi today was the result of the government’s failure to consult with the public before formulating policy, Mausoom argued.

Island development plans should “come from the people” and not from the central government, Mausoom said, adding that the government’s actions were defeating the purpose of the landmark Decentralisation Act.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Civil court rejects legal challenge to MPs’ committee allowance

The Civil Court today rejected a case filed on behalf of a civil servant challenging the legality of controversial Rf20,000-a-month committee allowances for MPs.

A group of concerned civil servants filed the case on behalf of Maah Jabeen, Seenu Maradhoo Fenzeemaage, arguing that releasing funds for committee allowance without reimbursing civil servants for amounts deducted from their 2010 salaries violated constitutional provisions on fairness and equal treatment.

On 26 September, the civil court issued an injunction prohibiting the Finance Ministry from releasing funds to parliament until the court delivered a judgment on the case.

In October 2009 – almost a year into the new administration – unpopular pay cuts of up to 15 percent for civil servants were enforced as part of austerity measures to alleviate the country’s ballooning budget deficit.

The austerity measures were met with a severe political backlash. In December 2009, the opposition-controlled parliament added Rf800 million (US$62 million) to the 2010 state budget, including the restoration of civil servant salaries to previous levels.

In January 2010, however, the Ministry of Finance and Treasury refused to restore the salaries after just three months of the cost-cutting measure.

After weeks of legal wrangling with the parliament-appointed Civil Service Commission (CSC), the ministry accused the independent commission of hiding “a political agenda”, and in February 2010 filed a case with the police asking them to investigate it on suspicion of trying to topple the government “and plunge the Maldives into chaos.”

At the height of the dispute in early 2010, permanent secretaries at ministries were ordered to submit different wage sheets by both the Finance Ministry and the CSC.

In April 2010, the Civil Court ruled that Finance Ministry did not have the legal authority to overrule the CSC. Although the government contested the ruling and refused to restore salaries to previous levels, the High Court upheld the lower court ruling in May this year.

Meanwhile in the verdict issued today, the Civil Court noted that the state had appealed the High Court ruling at the Supreme Court, which has since agreed to hear the case.

The court ruled that there were no legal grounds to order the Finance Ministry not to release the funds to parliament as the two budget items in question were “not in the same state or condition.”

Civic action

After parliament’s Public Accounts Committee decided to issue the committee allowance as a lump sum of Rf140,000 as back pay for January through June, a loose association of concerned citizens launched a campaign noting that the state had a staggering fiscal deficit of Rf1.3 billion (US$85 million) as of the first week of September.

Neither lawyer from the civic action campaign was available for comment today.

Some sources have meanwhile criticised the MPs for comparing their salaries and privileges to those of United States congressmen.

“You can’t do that, the two countries are too different,” said No MP Allowance Media Coordinator Hamza Khaleel.

“The salary difference between the highest-paid civil servant and a congressman in the US is 175%, while in the Maldives it’s 365%,” Khaleel pointed out. “Our MPs get as much as MPs in Sweden, but our GDP is nowhere near Sweden’s.”

NGOs have retreated from the issue in recent weeks, but No MP Allowance, a group of concerned citizens which operates primarily through social media outlet Facebook and has almost 3000 members, has been networking to protest the allowance since February. Khaleel said the group is the “single largest civil movement for this issue.”

“You can see that our Facebook page is very active. All of the members might not show up to protest but they are writing letters and suggesting ideas, so you can see that they are involved,” said Khaleel.

Khaleel noted that MP opposition and negative media have deterred the group from publicising its plans, but he said media coverage lately had improved.

Upon hearing of the court’s verdict today, Khaleel said No MP Allowance’s campaign did not depend on a court ruling but on the constituents’ opinions.

“If you ask the MP’s constituents, they will say that the MPs aren’t doing as much as they could have. Very few MPs have taken up issues that are community-focused,” he said.

“Our main focus is still to get constituents to write to their MPs asking them not to take the allowance. We have drafted sample letters that we are distributing for signatures, and will collect and deliver to the MPs. We represent the constituents, if they are not satisfied then we still have work to do,” Khaleel said.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

MP allowance debacle “not a mix-up”: State Finance Minister

The Finance Ministry today rejected implications that yesterday’s release and recall of the controversial Rf20,000-a-month committee allowances against a court injunction was a mistake which had caused confusion in the government.

“I don’t think it’s a mix-up,” said State Minister of Finance Ahmed Assad today. Assad was unclear about the court injunction.

“Releasing that sort of money is not a big procedure, I think this is just people trying to follow the general rules and experiencing an administrative error,” he said.

Assad didn’t believe anyone deserved blame, and said that “if anything, it is the ministry at large that was at fault.”

Local daily Haveeru yesterday reported that the allowances had been issued “by mistake.”

Finance Minister Ahmed Inaz had not responded to Minivan inquiries at time of press.

The court injunction, which was issued on September 26, ordered the Finance Ministry not to release funds for the committee allowance until the court rules on a case filed on behalf of a civil servant, contending that the allowance could not be given before deducted amounts from civil servants salaries were paid back.

The injunction has since been appealed by the Attorney General’s Office at the High Court, which is due to hold a first hearing on Sunday.

Parliamentary privileges

Meanwhile parliament yesterday debated a motion without notice proposed by Vilufushi MP Riyaz Rasheed claiming that a civic action campaign launched by concerned citizens in late August violated MPs’ special privileges.

MDP MP Ahmed Easa told Minivan News yesterday that colleagues had said the allowance was being released to the parliament secretariat, but he was told that it had been held back by the Minister of Finance.

“I don’t think there was any wording, anything in what the court said indicating that they couldn’t release the money,” said Easa. “But no money has been going in to my account today, I can tell you that.”

Easa elaborated on the allowance, saying that the amount of staffing support and allowances other government branches received justified MPs accepting the proposed allowance.

“The MP point of view is that some of the independent wages and allowances are greater than MPs. The MPs are expected to do research and other duties, but we don’t have an office, a supporting staff, a phone allowance, a travel stipend to visit constituents or other things to support our work. Seven percent of our salary is taken out for a pension fund, and Male’ is an expensive place to live,” said Easa.

Easa said he will accept the allowance, but pointed out that he had always objected to it in parliament on the grounds that all payrolls should be streamlined.

“But if these other government groups are taking an allowance, why not the MPs? This is a democracy, so I always respect the majority decision.”

Lawyer Mohamed Shafaz Wajeeh, one of two lawyers involved in the civil case, argued that the number of people benefiting from the allowance does not justify the sum released, which amounts to Rf18 million (US$1.1 million).

“It’s greed. Just greed,” Shafaz said. “MPs and higher-ups in the government are probably more aware of their own power than they should be. The thinking behind this goes against everything we know.”

Shafaz suggested the government consider other options, such as releasing the allowance in installments to lighten the burden on the state budget and other subsidiaries.

“But I’m not sure how much political will there is to do this. Everyone says the allowance is a good idea.”

Civil society

Although members of the civil sector earlier issued a statement objecting to the allowance, which they called “a gross injustice to the Maldivian people,” they have not articulated an official position on the issue of late.

Maldives Democracy Network (MDN) Director Fathimath Ibrahim Didi said that individuals in the organization were involved at the beginning, but that they did not represent MDN.

“Now, I think there may be a group working against the allowance, but it is loosely formed involving people from NGOs, lawyers and individuals,” she said.

Transparency Director Ilham Mohamed told Minivan News that a volunteer team was addressing the matter, but that large protests had not been organized among local non-government organizations (NGOs).

“I believe there may be sporadic gatherings in different places,” said Mohamed. “I do know that the NGOs that were involved in the original statement opposing the MP allowance are unified on this issue.”

“Symbolic”

The decision to approve the Rf20,000 (US$1200) monthly allowances in December 2010 was met with  protests and widespread public indignation. However in June this year, parliament rejected a resolution proposed by opposition Dhivehi Rayyithunge Party (DRP) MP Ahmed Mahlouf to scrap the allowance.

Meanwhile the current civic action campaign was prompted by parliament’s Public Accounts Committee (PAC) deciding in late August to to issue a lump sum of Rf140,000 (US$9,000) as committee allowance back pay for January through July this year.

Article 102 of the constitution states that parliament shall determine the salaries and allowances of the President, Vice President, cabinet ministers, members of parliament, members of the Judiciary, and members of the independent institutions.

The Rf20,000 allowance was initially approved on December 28, 2010 as part of a revised pay scheme recommended by the PAC.

During yesterday’s debate on a privileges motion regarding the anti-committee allowance campaign, MP ‘Colonel’ Mohamed Nasheed, a member of the PAC, explained that the committee felt that MPs should earn a higher salary than High Court judges.

“But even then the honourable members of the Public Accounts Committee believed that MPs were receiving a sufficiently large salary in relation to the country’s economic situation,” he said, adding that a decision was made to institute a “symbolic” committee allowance.

“The thinking at the time was to give it to MPs who attend committee meetings as a very symbolic thing, for example one laari or 15 laari. But to ensure that take-home pay for MPs would be Rf82,500,” he said.

However, he continued, this “noble effort” became politicised and the subject of “an anti-campaign programme.”

Colonel called for legal action against the activists “when they go beyond the boundaries of free expression” and the right to protest, claiming that MPs’ families and children had been targeted.

Echoing a claim made by a number of MPs yesterday, Colonel said none of his constituents had asked him to decline the allowance.

Likes(1)Dislikes(0)