Tag: supreme court

Maradhoo magistrate court declares alive voter considered deceased by Supreme Court

The magistrate court in the Maradhoo ward of Addu City has declared living a voter considered deceased by the Supreme Court in its judgment annulling the September 7 presidential election.

According to local media reports, the magistrate court made an announcement yesterday (October 30) after Mohamed Ahmed, of Muskuraanage, filed a complaint.

The Maradhoo resident was among three names provided as examples by Elections Commission (EC) Chair Fuwad Thowfeek of voters falsely deemed dead by the apex court.

Speaking to Maldives Broadcasting Corporation’s Raajje Miadhu (Maldives Today) programme this week, Thowfeek said the commission had discovered that at least four of the eighteen people deemed to be dead in the Supreme Court verdict were in fact alive.

In addition to Ahmed Mohamed, the EC had found that Ahmed Naseem from Male’, Fathmath Didi of Addu Atoll Hithadhoo Island and Khadeeja Gasim of Laamu Atoll Fonadhoo Island were alive.

“Like this, many people who are alive and had voted have been deemed by the Supreme court as votes cast by dead people, and based on that, they have annulled the election,” Fuwad said.

The EC and the Human Rights Commission have criticised the evidence used by the Supreme Court to annul the vote.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Ambassadors warned of international restrictions if no president by November 11: Nasheed

Foreign ambassadors have warned of international restrictions on trade and financial transactions if there is no president-elect by the end of the current presidential term on November 11, former President Mohamed Nasheed said at a press briefing yesterday (October 30).

To avert such a scenario, the opposition Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) presidential candidate suggested two solutions: the Supreme Court should review its judgment to annul the September 7 presidential election, or one of the two rival candidates should withdraw his candidacy “for the sake of the nation and Islam” ahead of the fresh polls scheduled for November 9.

“Ambassadors of foreign nations that I meet are now saying very openly that if there is no president-elect by November 11 they would have to take action under their normal rules or procedures,” Nasheed said.

A nation without an elected president is considered a dictatorship and prone to instability and unrest by the international community, he added.

Nasheed referred to financial sanctions imposed by the United States and Europe on troubled states such as Sudan and Myanmar.

If similar sanctions are imposed on the Maldives, Nasheed said the country would face difficulties in both importing essential goods, such as oil, medicine and foodstuffs, and continuing to export fish to Europe.

“If we cannot hold an election, we will be forced to conduct all business transactions overseas with cash,” he continued, as restrictions would apply to transactions through foreign financial institutions and banks.

“We are concerned because we can see Maldivians having to bear this burden. We are concerned that our rivals, even under these circumstances, are trying to stop the election and maintain the coup government,” said Nasheed.

The European Parliament in Strasbourg this week heard calls from UK MEP Charles Tannock to apply “maximum pressure”  to reverse what he described as a “judicial coup” in the Maldives.

Rival candidates only considered discussions to conclude the presidential election before November 11 after parliament “with a comfortable majority” passed the MDP’s proposal for the speaker of parliament to assume the presidency in the absence of a president-elect, Nasheed contended.

On the day parliament adopted the MDP resolution, he continued, the PPM and JP “realised that the coup government cannot be maintained even if they obstruct the election.”

“Even when we went to the Elections Commission, we all knew very clearly that it was unlikely that both rounds of the election could be held before November 11 while abiding by the Supreme Court guidelines,” Nasheed said.

Two options

Nasheed stressed that either a Supreme Court review or a candidate’s withdrawal was necessary to ensure a victor in one round to conclude the election by November 11.

As it was the Jumhooree Party that sought annulment of the September 7 election, Nasheed urged the party’s candidate Gasim Ibrahim to file a case at the apex court requesting a review of its decision.

“We are now at the mouth of a pit, on the edge of a razor blade,” said Nasheed, describing the consequences of repeated election delays.

Asked if either candidate had responded to his appeal for one of the pair to withdraw, Nasheed said he was hopeful but could not say he got “a clear answer.”

“I am certain that Gasim’s question will be, ‘why me?’ The answer is because you are the most sincere,” he said.

In lieu of a candidate dropping out of the race, Nasheed said the second option was for the Supreme Court to review its judgment and allow the second round to take place on November 9.

If none of the two scenarios came to pass, Nasheed expressed confidence of winning the election on November 9 “in one round” against the PPM and JP candidates.

“In my view, the Maldivian people’s patience has run out because of the efforts to stop the election from taking place. Fishermen can’t go fishing. People can’t leave on a holiday or for medical treatment overseas. And the campaign activists do not want in the slightest for their lives to return to normalcy,” he said.

Nasheed questioned the sincerity of the JP and PPM’s request for the Elections Commission to conclude the election before November 11 as both parties were insisting on following the Supreme Court guidelines whilst calling for Dr Waheed to remain in office.

Nasheed emerged the front-runner in the annulled September 7 election with 45.45 percent of the vote followed by Progressive Party of Maldives candidate Abdulla Yameen who polled 25.35 percent, necessitating a second round run-off.

Business tycoon Gasim narrowly missed out in a place in the run-off election with 24.07 percent of the vote and contested the results at the Supreme Court alleging widespread electoral fraud.

Meanwhile, at a press conference yesterday, JP Deputy Leader Ilham Ahmed emphatically dismissed Nasheed’s calls for Gasim to withdraw, calling instead for Nasheed to step back for the good of the nation.

“There is a fear that Islam will disappear if you [come to power]. There is a fear that there will be bloodshed here caused by introduction of other religions. There is a fear that you will sell of the nation’s assets,” he said.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Pronounced dead: ‘Deceased’ voters found to be alive

When Ahmed Naseem, 48, attempted to verify his information on the voter registry for the new presidential elections scheduled for November 9, he found he had been taken off the list.

The Supreme Court in its verdict annulling the first round of presidential election held on September 7 had deemed him dead and had counted his vote as fraudulent.

“I am saddened and quite fed up. I have been deprived of my right to vote,” Naseem told Minivan News. “Now I have to go to court to regain my identity.”

The Supreme Court annulled the September 7 vote, citing widespread electoral fraud despite unanimous international and domestic praise of a free and fair electoral process.

The apex court claims 5623 ineligible votes were cast – a number that could have altered the narrow margin between the second and third placed candidates.

These votes include votes allegedly cast by 18 dead people, 7 minors, 225 people without authentic identity cards, 773 people with discrepancies in their national identification numbers, 2830 people with discrepancies in their addresses, 952 people with discrepancies in their names, 7 people who did not exist, and 819 people whose national identification numbers were written down wrong by election officials at the time of voting.

Naseem said the Elections Commission had told him he will not be allowed to vote unless he obtains a court document confirming that he is in fact still alive.

“Now, I will not be able to use my identity card for anything,” he said.

Naseem’s wife, Mariyam Zubair, has written to the Supreme Court’s Chief Justice Ahmed Faiz today informing the apex court that her husband is alive.

“The Supreme Court’s verdict no 2013/SC-C/42 has deemed me to be a widow by law,” the letter shared on Twitter said. “I request you to annul [the Supreme Court] decision that my husband is dead and remove my widowhood.”

Back from the dead

Speaking to Maldives Broadcasting Corporation’s Raajje Miadhu (Maldives Today) program, EC President Fuwad Thowfeek said the commission had discovered that at least four of the eighteen people deemed to be dead in the Supreme Court verdict were in fact alive.

In addition to Naseem, the EC had found that Mohamed Ahmed of Addu Atoll Maradhoo Island, Fathmath Didi of Addu Atoll Hithadhoo Island and Khadeeja Gasim of Laamu Atoll Fonadhoo Island were alive.

“Like this, many people who are alive and had voted have been deemed by the Supreme court as votes cast by dead people, and based on that, they have annulled the election,” Fuwad said.

The EC and the Human Rights Commission have criticized the evidence used by the Supreme Court to annul the vote.

In an interview on October 19, Fuwad suggested the Supreme Court was disenfranchising individuals by invalidating votes of those who had address or name mismatches between their identity cards and the voter registry.

“For example, a person called Mohamed Waheed Hassan, may have his name on ID card as Mohamed Waheed. When we gave him the right to vote, they counted it as a fraudulent vote. But the ID card number, address, date of birth and photo is the same … We know it is the same person, the date of birth is exact, the ID card number is the same, photo shows it is the right person,” said Fuwad.

“When we give these people the right to vote, [the Supreme Court] has said that is giving the right to vote to a person who doesn’t have the right to vote,” Fuwad said.

The HRCM, in a leaked report, conducted an analysis of the Supreme Court’s evidence, finding only 1033 of the 5623 votes could be considered irregular.

The commission said the EC may have given 952 individuals with differences in the spelling of their names the right to vote to ensure an eligible voter is not disenfranchised, especially in cases where all other information and picture on the identification documents match.

Further, the commission notes that the 2830 cases of address mismatch should only be counted as evidence if any individual has used the discrepancy to violate another person’s right to vote.

“We do not believe address mismatches can influence the result of this election as this is not constituency specific,” the report said.

Dissenting judges in the Supreme Court verdict said it is the High Court, not the Supreme Court who has jurisdiction over the case. Further, Chief Justice Ahmed Faiz and Justice Abdulla Areef only noted 473 cases of possible fraud.

A new presidential election has been set for November 9. The Supreme Court ordered the EC to discard its voter registry and compile a new one based on the Department of National Registration’s database.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

“Supreme Court is subverting the democratic process”: UN High Commissioner for Human Rights

United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights Navi Pillay has released a statement on Wednesday expressing concern about “the dangerous drift in the democratic process in the Maldives largely as a result of the Supreme Court’s repeated interventions in the presidential election process”.

“I am alarmed that the Supreme Court of the Maldives is interfering excessively in the Presidential elections, and in so doing is subverting the democratic process and violating the right of Maldivians to freely elect their representatives,” the statement read.

The Supreme Court immediately hit back today, with Chief Justice Ahmed Faiz describing Pillay’s comments as “poorly researched” and  “irresponsible”.

“The Supreme Court nullified the first round of the Presidential Election of 7 September 2013 on the basis of irregularities in the process, despite the general conclusions by national and international observers that the election was free and fair,” read Pillay’s statement.

Pillay also described the court’s election guidelines as “onerous” and “difficult to satisfy”.

“There have been longstanding concerns about the independence and impartiality of the judiciary in the Maldives, which both the High Commissioner and the Special Rapporteur on Independence of Judges and Lawyers, Gabriela Knaul, addressed during official visits to the country in 2011 and 2013,” added Pillay

“I am normally the first to defend the independence of the judiciary, but this also carries responsibilities. Judges should act in accordance with the principles of impartiality, propriety, equality and due diligence, as reflected in the UN Basic Principles on the Independence of Judiciary, the Bangalore Principles of Judicial Conduct, and Maldives’ own code of conduct,” Pillay stated.

The statement further also expressed concern regarding the court’s threats to charge lawyers, media and civil society groups for challenging its decisions, as well as “the reactivation of old cases to arrest opposition MPs or bar them from Parliament.”

“The Supreme Court appears set on undermining other independent institutions, stifling criticism and public debate, and depriving litigants of the legal representation of their choice,” Pillay stated.

Chief Justice’s response

“I harshly condemn UN High Commissioner for Human Rights Navi Pillay’s  false allegations regarding the Maldives Supreme Court’s work to uphold its constitutional duties and responsibilities. I do not believe she has any authority to speak in such terms,” responded Chief Justice Faiz today.

Defending the court’s neutrality, Faiz argued that Pillay’s statement was unacceptable for an official operating under the UN’s mandate to protect the rights of large and small states alike.

“False allegations by any party on the Supreme Court’s work does not aid strengthening democracy, administration of justice in the Maldives or uphold the rule of law. It does not encourage the promotion of democracy, rule of law or protection of human rights,” read Faiz’s statement.

The first round of the Maldives presidential election – held on September 7 was annulled by the Supreme Court earlier this month, with a fresh round of elections arranged to be held on October 19.

The re-scheduled vote, however, was also cancelled after police obstructed the Elections Commission, citing the Supreme Court’s issued 16 regulation as justification.

As well as condemning the police for the delay, the Human Rights Commission of the Maldives has also condemned the police for “acting beyond its mandate”, while a leaked report by the commission questions the credibility of the evidence used by the apex court in its annulment of the first round of elections.

A joint statement by the International Federation for Human Rights and local NGO Maldives Democracy Network has described the court’s verdict as being founded on “materially baseless arguments”, after the first round was “applauded as a success by the international community.”

A new first round is now scheduled for November 9, with the EC President Fuwad Thowfeek maintaining it will not be changed despite requests to expedite the polling date from both the current government and the contesting presidential candidates.

Government-aligned parties go to SC for political solutions

Progressive Party of Maldives lawyer Ibrahim ‘Wadde’ Waheed submitted a case to the Supreme Court on Tuesday seeking a ruling on the motion passed by the parliament to appoint Speaker Abdulla Shahid as interim head of state in the instance that an elected president cannot be installed by the constitutionally mandated date, November 11.

Waheed is quoted in local media as saying the parliamentary motion has been passed against the constitution and the verdicts of the Supreme Court.

On the same day, Wadde has also submitted another case to the court asking it to rule that the MDP MP Ahmed Hamza’s appointment to the judicial watchdog – the Judicial Services Commission (JSC) – was conducted in breach of the constitution.

In this case, Wadde argued that Hamza is a person who works “against the judiciary” and so he finds it “unacceptable that such a man can serve in the JSC”.

Earlier this month Wadde, alongside Jumhooree Coalition member ‘Madhanee Ihthihaadh’ (Civil Alliance) President Sheikh Mohamed Didi, filed a case in the apex court challenging opposition Maldivian Democratic Party candidate and former President Mohamed Nasheed’s candidacy.

The petition gave as grounds Nasheed’s criticism of the judiciary, as well as his “outright criticism towards Islam and iposing Islamic Sharia’ in the Maldives”.

Jumhooree Coalition’s Presidential Candidate Gasim Ibrahim has also this week called on President Dr Mohamed Waheed to seek advice from the apex court on the course of action he should take should there not be an elected leader by November 11.

Speaking at a party rally, Gasim stated that as Waheed has previously written to the parliament for advice, he believes the president should also seek the opinion of the Supreme Court.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Chief Justice threatens action against dissemination of “invalid information”

Legal action will be taken against media organisations or journalists who disseminate false or inauthentic information concerning the judiciary, Chief Justice Ahmed Faiz Hussain has warned.

Speaking at a swearing-in ceremony yesterday (October 27) for seven new judges to the superior courts, the Chief Justice warned of measures against those who report “invalid information, if it relates to courts or judges.”

“Citizens need valid information. Freedom of expression means expressing valid or authentic information. Whether it is information relating to individuals or state institutions, the information conveyed should be valid, there should be no error or deceit in the information,” he said.

“If the court is held in contempt, action will be taken,” he asserted. “I will not allow the court to be [held in] contempt through deception. If the court is [held in] contempt, I will do what I can within the bounds of the law,” Faiz added.

The Chief Justice’s remarks came after the Supreme Court last week ordered police to investigate opposition-aligned private broadcaster Raajje TV for airing a report on October 19 criticising the judiciary.

Raajje TV News Department Head Ibrahim ‘Asward’ Waheed was summoned to the police headquarters last night concerning the investigation of the report, which raised issues surrounding the leaked sex tape of Supreme Court Justice Ali Hameed.

Following the police interrogation, Asward told local media that he was accused of contempt of court over the Raajje TV report criticising the apex court.

Asward said he exercised the right to remain silent in protest of the police taking over the mandate of the Maldives Media Council (MMC) and the Maldives Broadcasting Commission (MBC) – the institutions legally empowered to investigate complaints regarding the content of media outlets.

Both the MCC and MBC have expressed concern with the court ordered investigation of Raajje TV, contending that it threatens press freedom and encroaches on the mandate of the media watchdog bodies.

Appealing to the apex court to withdraw the order to investigate, Mohamed Shaheeb from the MBC told local media yesterday that he was informed by Commissioner of Police Abdulla Riyaz that the police were obliged to obey the Supreme Court’s order.

Following an arson attack that destroyed the headquarters of Raajje TV on October 7, Reporters Without Borders criticised the police’s failure to defend the station despite repeated requests for protection.

Moreover, Asward was attacked with an iron bar in February this year while Raajje TV’s offices were vandalised in 2012, with cables severed in the station’s control room.

Judicial reform

Faiz meanwhile contended that altering the composition of the 10-member Judicial Service Commission (JSC) –  consisting of three representatives each from the executive, legislature and judiciary as well as a lawyer elected by licensed practitioners – was necessary to strengthen the judiciary.

In a comprehensive report on the Maldivian judiciary released in May, the UN Special Rapporteur on the Independence of Lawyers and Judges, Gabriela Knaul, stated that there was near unanimous consensus during her visit that the composition of the JSC was “inadequate and politicised.”

The issue was also highlighted in a report by the International Committee of Jurists (ICJ) in 2010.

“Because of this politicisation, the commission has allegedly been subjected to all sorts of external influence and has consequently been unable to function properly,” said Knaul.

While the composition of the JSC in the Maldivian constitution was based on the South African model, Faiz said in his speech yesterday that he was told by a retired South African judge that the model had “failed” in his country.

“A lot of people believe that every fault of the JSC is reflected in the judiciary,” Faiz said, adding that proper functioning of the oversight body would benefit the judiciary.

The JSC should work together with the courts following extensive consultation to implement changes to strengthen the judiciary, Faiz suggested.

The JSC should also expedite investigations of complaints concerning judges and “free” them from the allegations to ensure public confidence in the “integrity of judges,” he said.

“If not, the issues we are facing now, what is being said [about the judiciary] now will continue in the same vein,” Faiz said.

However, he added, criticism of the judiciary or “a complaint against a judge” does not warrant disregarding court judgments.

“If the decisions of the courthouse are not enforced, rule of law will not be maintained in this country. The courthouse has been entrusted with upholding rule of law. So the decisions of courts should be and will be enforced in this country,” Faiz asserted.

Under no circumstances could the enforcement of a court decision be delayed or ignored, he stressed.

Faiz revealed that he had spoken to the speaker of parliament regarding a recent Supreme Court judgment, referring to the apex court disqualifying two MPs over an alleged decreed debt.

“I told him that the Supreme Court’s decision must be enforced. There is no question about it. Who will determine if the Supreme Court’s decision is legitimate? Who will determine if the Supreme Court decision was made in accordance with the procedures? It will still be determined by the Supreme Court,” Faiz said.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Police send summons to Raajje TV News Head and CEO

Police have sent a summons to Maldivian Democratic Party aligned private broadcasting channel Raajje TV News Department Head Ibrahim ‘Asward’ Waheed and CEO Yamin Rasheed.

The summons chit did not specify why he was being summoned but stated it was in relation to a case being investigated by the police’s Serious and Organized Crime Department.

Speaking to Minivan News today Asward said that the police have not told him or Raajje TV why he was being summoned but have told other media outlets that the matter is related to a report he made for  Raajje TV concerning the Supreme Court and some issues with the judiciary.

”I asked the officers who handed me the summon chit,” he said. ”But they said they don’t know what’s it about.”

He said he will comment on the issue after going to police tonight.

Station CEO Yamin has also been summoned to police, saying the investigation surrounded a “normal report” broadcast on October 19 concerning the independence of the court, as well as issues surrounding Justice Ali Hameed.

Hameed – currently being investigated for his alleged role in a string of sex-tapes – has borne the brunt of attacks on the court following its annulment of the first round of the presidential elections this month.

Meanwhile, the Maldives Broadcasting Commission – mandated to oversee the media – yesterday expressed concern over a warrant issued by the Supreme Court ordering that the police investigate Raajje TV regarding the report.

Yamin today said that the commission had requested that the court rescind the order. He said that the police’s investigation of the report violated the Broadcasting Act, describing it as “unfair”.

Head of the commission Mohamed Shaheeb told local media last night that there was no use of keeping the commission if someone else was doing the its duties.

He said that anything related to the media should be investigated by the commission and not by anyone else.

Previously Shaheeb said that he talked to police commissioner Abdulla Riyaz regarding the case and that Riyaz told the commission it was an order issued by the Supreme Court and that there was nothing police could do about it.

In February this year, Raajje TV News Head Asward was attacked with an iron bar while riding on a motorcycle near the  artificial beach area on Boduthakurufaanu Magu, the biggest street in Male’.

He barely survived the injuries and still is yet to fully recover.

Raajje TV’s offices were also sabotaged in 2012, with cables being cut in the station’s control room.

On October 7, five masked men entered Raajje TV station and set the place on fire burning the whole control room of the station to ashes.

The role of police on the night of the attack was criticised by both Raajje TV, who had given police notice that such an attack had been threatened, and Reporters Without Borders (RSF).

“We deplore the attitude of the police, who failed to do what was necessary to prevent the attack although the head of TV station requested protection a few hours before it took place,” RSF said in a statement on Monday.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

MP Azim’s arrest extended for 15 days

The Criminal Court has extended Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) MP Ali Azim’s detention by 15 days.

The Maldives National Defense Forces (MNDF) stormed the People’s Majlis yesterday and forcibly removed Azim, handing him over to Maldives Police Services on charges of assaulting an MNDF officer.

Azim’s lawyer Mohamed Fareed said the MP is currently in Dhoonidhoo Island Remand Center and is in good health.

The MNDF obstructed Azim from entering Majlis after the Supreme Court had stripped him and DRP MP Mohamed Nashiz of their parliamentary seats over decreed debt on October 22.

Dissenting judges said the two MPs cannot be disqualified as the two were guarantors on a loan in which mortgaged assets had been taken over by the creditor. The parliamentary privileges committee has said it does not accept the “politically motivated” ruling as it was issued against the Supreme Court’s procedures.

Speaker Abdulla Shahid has sent a letter to the Chief of Defense Forces Ahmed Shiyam condemning the army’s actions in obstructing and removing Azim from the Majlis.

Shahid called on Shiyam to act within the confines of the law in overseeing Majlis security.

Noting that the constitution and Parliamentary Privileges and Powers Act affords the Majlis speaker control over Majlis premises and that the MNDF is required to act on the Speaker’s orders within the parliament, the letter said, “We note, with great sadness, that the [MNDF] acted against the aforementioned procedures in obstructing and arresting Medhu Henveiru MP Ali Azim.”

“At the request of the Chief of Defense Forces, the Majlis had sent a letter outlining how the [MNDF] were to act on the matter. However, without any instructions from the Majlis Speaker, a large number of uniformed MNDF officers entered the People’s Majlis and forcibly removed Ali Azim,” the statement read.

The letter further stated that the MNDF had infringed upon the powers of the Majlis Speaker as detailed in the Constitution and Act no 5/2013 on the Parliament’s Privileges and powers.

No contact with speaker, say MNDF

Article 4 of parliamentary regulations read: “Unless otherwise explicitly stated in the Constitution or laws, the Majlis building, chambers, the pathways and corridors leading to the chambers within the Majlis premises and the Majlis courtyard is under the control and orders of the Majlis Speaker.”

However, the MNDF in a statement disputed receipt of a letter by the speaker, claiming that he had failed to respond to the MNDF’s request for instructions on how to proceed on the Azim and Nashiz case.

“The Maldives National Defense Forces will not prevent the two from entering the People’s Majlis if the Speaker orders the MNDF in writing to let them enter the Majlis,” the MNDF said.

The President’s Office has said the government accepts the disqualification of the two members, stating that the removal of Azim from the Majlis premises was the MNDF’s duty.

“The government believes that the two disqualified members no longer hold seats in the parliament. MNDF, as part of their duty, has prevented one of the disqualified members from entering the parliament building today. When this particular member assaulted the MNDF security officers, MNDF has now handed over custody of the member to Maldives Police Service,” a statement by the President’s Office said.

“Every Maldivian citizen must at all times obey the Constitution. In this regard, every citizen must respect the courts’ rulings. The government will not tolerate any individual who challenges the courts’ decisions,” the statement added.

The MDP has condemned the government and Supreme Court’s “purging” of its MPs, and has suggested that Azim and Nashiz’s removal was to obstruct a no confidence motion scheduled against Attorney General Azima Shakoor. The party has also submitted no-confidence motions against Defense Minister Mohamed Nazim and Prosecutor General (PG) Ahmed Muizz.

Three MDP MPs are currently on trial, while police have asked the PG to prosecute four additional MDP MPs.

MP Ali Waheed is on trial for disobedience to order for crossing a police barricade, while Hamid Abdul Gafoor and Abdulla Jabir are on trial for alleged alcohol and drug abuse. Police are charging MPs Alhan Fahmy, Imthiyaz Fahmy and Mohamed Rasheed with contempt of court for criticizing the Supreme Court, and MP Ibrahim Rasheed with assaulting a police officer.

The MDP notes corruption charges against several government aligned MPs have been dropped since the controversial transfer of power in February 2012.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Dr Latheef cannot be sworn in to JSC due to Supreme Court judgment: President’s Office

Cabinet Secretary Dr Abdulla Nazeer told parliament’s Government Oversight Committee on Thursday (October 24) that the President’s Office could not organise a swearing-in ceremony to formalise Civil Service Commission (CSC) Chair Dr Mohamed Latheef’s appointment to the Judicial Service Commission (JSC) due to a Supreme Court ruling declaring that parliament’s removal of former CSC Chair Mohamed Fahmy Hassan was unconstitutional.

Dr Latheef was appointed chair of the CSC by parliament in August with 60 votes in favour. While the chair of the CSC is also an ex-officio member of the JSC, Dr Latheef has yet to be formally appointed to the judicial watchdog body by the President’s Office.

Responding to queries regarding the delay from MPs on the oversight committee last week, President Dr Mohamed Waheed’s cabinet secretary said that the Attorney General had advised that Dr Latheef could not be sworn in to the JSC due to the Supreme Court judgment.

Dr Nazeer repeatedly insisted that a solution to the impasse must be found either by the People’s Majlis or the Supreme Court.

Asked who the current chair of the CSC was, Nazeer replied: “To tell you truth, I do not know. So someone should clear this up.”

While he was unaware which of the two received the salary and benefits of the CSC chair, Nazeer said the President’s Office does not state the name of the commission’s chair in official correspondence with the CSC.

In November last year parliament voted 38–32 in favour of removing Fahmy after the Independent Institutions Committee investigated a complaint of sexual harassment lodged by a female CSC employee.

The Supreme Court however overruled parliament in March this year on the grounds that the committee allegedly violated due process and criminal justice procedures in its sexual harassment inquiry, and that Fahmy would receive two punishments for the same crime if he was convicted at court (double jeopardy).

Parliament had approved a replacement for Fahmy – Fathmath Renee Abdul Sattar – in August this year with 51 votes in favour and none against. However, shortly before a swearing-in ceremony at the President’s Office to present Renee her credentials, the Supreme Court issued an injunction to block her appointment.

However, the following day Chief Justice Ahmed Faiz Hussain accused his own court of issuing the injunction without his knowledge.

Former JSC member Aishath Velazinee has argued that the Majlis was given authority over CSC appointments in 2010, describing the Supreme Court’s move as a “mutiny”.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Media Council expresses concern with court ordered police investigation of Raajje TV

The Maldives Media Council (MMC) has expressed concern with the Supreme Court asking police to investigate a report aired by opposition-aligned private broadcaster Raajje TV.

The MMC noted in a press release yesterday (October 25) that attending complaints concerning the content of Maldivian media outlets and taking measures was within the legal mandate of the media council and the Maldives Broadcasting Commission (MBC).

“The Maldives Media Council Act states that it is the media council that should investigate issues concerning press freedom and take measures. And a police investigation of such a case would be an obstruction of the press freedom established in the Maldives as well as an act that would instil fear in the hearts of journalists,” the statement read.

The MMC statement concluded by urging all state institutions to submit complaints regarding the media to the council and to “respect the laws and the bounds of the constitution.”

According to local media reports, the Supreme Court asked both the police and the broadcasting commission to investigate the Raajje TV report.

Mohamed Shaheeb from the broadcasting commission told newspaper Haveeru that the Supreme Court ordered the commission to share the findings of its investigation within 10 days.

Shaheeb noted that the law gave the commission 60 days to investigate complaints, adding that it had to provide sufficient time to the accused media outlet to respond to the charges.

The offending programme on Raajje TV reportedly compared the state of the Maldivian judiciary to the injustice of ancient Sodom.

Following an arson attack that destroyed the headquarters of Raajje TV on October 7, Reporters Without Borders criticised the police’s failure to defend the station despite repeated requests for police protection.

“Contempt of court”

The Supreme Court has previously asked the police to investigate lawyers and MPs for alleged contempt of court for publicly criticising the judiciary.

In February 2013, the Supreme Court suspended lawyer Abdulla Haseen after he criticised the judiciary in an appearance on Raajje TV.

Haseen was barred from advocating in any court in the country while the Supreme Court asked police to investigate him for contempt of court.

The Prosecutor General’s Office however decided not to prosecute Haseen after police concluded its investigation.

However, opposition Maldivian Democratic Party MPs Imthiyaz Fahmy and Alhan Fahmy have been charged with contempt of court after allegedly defaming the Supreme Court.

In a comprehensive report on the Maldivian judiciary released in May, United Nations (UN) Special Rapporteur on the Independence of Lawyers and Judges, Gabriela Knaul, expressed concern over “the case of a lawyer who had been indefinitely suspended by the Supreme Court for allegedly criticizing one of its judgements in public”.

“Such a suspension leaves no avenue for appeal and review and it represents a violation of the rights of the lawyer. The Special Rapporteur is also concerned about reports regarding threats of contempt of court used to muzzle the freedom of expression of lawyers,” the report stated.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)