Tag: supreme court

Nasheed calls for tourism workers to strike should election be delayed

Former President and Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) presidential candidate Mohamed Nasheed has called on tourism workers to strike, should run-off elections scheduled for September 28 be delayed.

Following Nasheed’s appeal, the Maldives Association for Tourism Industries (MATI) issued a statement warning of “irreparable consequences” to the Maldivian economy unless the election is expedited.

“It is absolutely important to expedite the election and settle the issue or else there would be irreparable consequences to the Maldives, and especially to tourism which is the back bone of the economy. Therefore, it is important for everyone to see the importance of this in the interest of the country at large,” said MATI Chairman M.U. Manik, one of pioneers of the country’s 40 year-old tourism industry.

The Supreme Court ordered the Elections Commission (EC) on Monday to indefinitely postpone run-off polls until it issues a verdict in an ongoing case filed by the Jumhooree Party, which placed third and is now seeking to annul the vote.

Nasheed emerged as the front runner in the first round of the polls with 45.45 percent (95,224 votes), followed by Progressive Party of Maldives (PPM) candidate Abdulla Yameen who received 25.35 percent (53,099 votes). JP candidate and resort tycoon Gasim Ibrahim narrowly missed out on the run-off with 24.07 percent (50,422), and contested the results at the Supreme Court alleging electoral fraud despite unanimous positive assessments of polls by local and international election observers.

“I call on tourist workers to strike if there is no election on Saturday. For everyone to strike. There is an election scheduled on Saturday – whether that election happens or not is in one sense in your hands and mine,” Nasheed told tourism workers, at an event on Monday evening to explain the party’s manifesto.

Secretary General of the Tourism Employees Association of the Maldives (TEAM), Mauroof Zakir, told Minivan News the organisation was holding discussions on whether to endorse Nasheed’s call.

“We are discussing whether TEAM as an organisation will back [Nasheed’s] call or leave it up to individual resort workers. We have to think about the consequences on employees’ jobs. Many resort workers are calling us and are saying they are willing to go on strike, but in such a way that resorts continue to operate,” Mauroof said.

The tourism industry is indirectly responsible for upwards of 70 percent of the Maldives’ GDP, and a substantial majority of Maldivian resort workers support the MDP.

Results from resort ballot boxes in the first round revealed overwhelming support for the party, even at many properties owned by Nasheed’s political opponents such as Vice President Waheed Deen’s Bandos Island Resort (51 percent MDP).

The trend was particularly notable at prominent international chains in the luxury tourism sector, famous for providing relaxing and idyllic escapes for honeymooners, including Sheraton Maldives Full Moon Resort and Spa (58 percent MDP), Dusit Thaani Maldives (73 percent MDP), Conrad Maldives Rangali Island Resort (62 percent MDP), and One and Only Reethi Rah (75 percent MDP).

Tourism Minister Ahmed Adheeb has meanwhile told local media he will not allow politicians to sacrifice the tourism industry and its workers, and appealed to staff not to strike.

“They plan and involve the tourism industry every time there is political turmoil, every time things do not happen as they want. They called for a tourism boycott in international media. There were effects from that. We are seeing the same thing now. We cannot allow any politician to involve the tourism industry in politics. We cannot allow politicians to sacrifice the tourism industry and its workers every time things are politically turbulent,” he told newspaper Haveeru.

The Supreme Court will be hearing closing arguments this evening.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Maldives democratic transition in “limbo”: Institute for Defence Studies and Analyses

“With the Maldivian Supreme Court postponing second round of elections, the democratic transition in the Maldives has gone into limbo,” writes Anand Kumar in a comment piece for the Institute for Defence Studies and Analyses (IDSA).

“The confusion prevailing in the country after the first round of elections has also made it clear that whosoever emerges victorious after the second round if it is held at all, he may find opposition quite difficult to handle in the aftermath of elections,” added Kumar.

“The much awaited multi-party elections in Maldives took place on September 7, 2013. As expected the first round failed to throw up a clear winner. This has now necessitated a second round which was earlier scheduled for September 28, 2013, and has now been postponed.

In the run-off election top two candidates from the earlier round would contest. They are Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) candidate, Mohamed Nasheed and Progressive Party of Maldives (PPM) candidate Abdulla Yameen. However, the third candidate, Qasim Ibrahim from Jumhooree Party who lost by a whisker does not seem satisfied with the results and has gone to the court. In response to his petition the Supreme Court of Maldives has suspended presidential elections sparking protests and fears of instability in the archipelago country.

The polls in Maldives generated lot of enthusiasm among the people. They turned out in large numbers and nearly 88 percent of eligible voters used their franchise. In Maldives, the total number of voters is 2,39,593 out of which 2,11,890 cast their ballot. Former president Mohamed Nasheed managed 95,224 (45.45 per cent). Yameen, half brother of former president Maumoon Abdul Gayoom came second with 53,099 votes (25.35 per cent) and business tycoon Qasim Ibrahim came a close third with 50,422 votes (24.07 per cent). President Mohamed Waheed Hassan Manik finished last with 10,750 votes (5.13 per cent).

The interesting part of first round of polling is that business tycoon, Qasim Ibrahim who is also supported by the fundamentalist Adhaalath Party lost by a whisker. This has made swallowing defeat little difficult for him. Similarly, incumbent President Mohamed Waheed Hassan Manik polled just five percent of the votes and probably is the first sitting president anywhere in the world to get such low percentage in a re-election.

This clearly shows that his was not a popular government though earlier a Commonwealth-led probe had stated that the transfer of power was done according to the constitution. The Commission of National Inquiry (CoNI) set up by the Maldivian government last year had also found no evidence of a coup.

Qasim Ibrahim who came third with less than 3000 votes has alleged irregularity in polling. He alleged that there are several flaws in the voter list. He has claimed that he could have easily got between 10,000 to 30,000 more votes. He has disputed the result in the High Court, Supreme Court, at rallies, and on his television station – Villa TV – declaring that he should have been placed first. Interestingly, PPM has also extended support to Qasim Ibrahim and has accepted the Supreme Court’s decision to delay the elections.

There is nothing wrong with Qasim Ibrahim going to the courts. But Maldives judiciary has its own problem. Supreme Court Judge Ali Hameed has been implicated in a series of widely circulated obscene videos, but the judicial oversight body Judicial Services Commission (JSC) decided not to suspend the judge against the recommendation of a subcommittee it set up to investigate the matter. This happened because Qasim Ibrahim was a member of the JSC at the time and he stopped all action against the judge.

Read more.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

MDP calls on Supreme Court to remain within “legal ambit of the constitution”

The Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) has called on the Supreme Court to “restrain itself to the legal ambit of the constitution” in an open letter from the party’s chairperson ‘Reeko’ Moosa Manik to Chief Justice Ahmed Faiz Hussain on Tuesday (September 24).

The party contended that its lawyers Hassan Latheef and Hisaan Hussain were “unlawfully suspended” by the apex court in ongoing proceedings of the Jumhooree Party’s case against the Elections Commission (EC) seeking annulment of the first round of the presidential election on September 7.

“Despite the Maldivian Democratic Party’s legal team claiming that proceedings cannot be held without their representation, the court’s decision to proceed regardless is in breach of the constitution, laws, regulation and juridical norms adhered to in the Maldives thus far,” the letter stated.

“Furthermore, it is of concern that during the proceedings there was apparent deferential treatment towards other parties to the case. Therefore, considering the manner in which the court has acted during these proceedings thus far, and since the party believes that proceedings will not continue in a way which guarantees the rights of the 95,000 people who publicly shown support for the party, this party wishes to revoke its inter-partes claim to the motion filed at the court.”

The MDP lawyers along with EC lawyer Husnu Suood were barred from proceedings by the Supreme Court yesterday for publicly criticising the court’s order indefinitely postponing the second round run-off of the presidential election scheduled for September 28.

“Journey to Justice”

In the wake of the Supreme Court’s stay order (Dhivehi) on Monday night (September 23), the party’s National Council passed a resolution approving continuous protests until a date was given for the run-off election.

MDP Spokesperson Hamed Abdul Ghafoor described the Supreme Court’s suspension of the election pending a judgment on the JP’s case as “a cynical attempt by President [Mohamed] Nasheed’s political opponents to delay an election they feared they were likely to lose.”

Nasheed emerged as the front runner in the first round of the polls with 45.45 percent (95,224 votes), followed by Progressive Party of Maldives (PPM) candidate Abdulla Yameen who received 25.35 percent (53,099 votes). The JP candidate Gasim Ibrahim narrowly missed out on the run-off with 24.07 percent (50,422) and contested the results at the Supreme Court alleging electoral fraud.

The JP and the PPM welcomed the Supreme Court injunction as a positive step towards ensuring a free and fair election. PPM candidate Abdulla Yameen told Minivan News that there was “nothing unconstitutional” with the court order.

“The Elections Commission got the opportunity to argue out their case and establish the credibility of the process,” he said.

The MDP yesterday relaunched its “Journey to Justice” demonstration at the Raalhugadu (surf point) area of the capital Male’ – 18 months after being evicted from the site by security forces – where it had set up a protest camp in February 2012 following former President Mohamed Nasheed’s resignation in what the party has maintained was a “coup d’etat” instigated by mutinous elements of the police and military working with the then-opposition.

The MDP chairperson’s letter to the Chief Justice meanwhile called upon the highest court of appeal to “uphold Article 8 of the Constitution [which] states that all powers of the State shall be exercised in accordance with the Constitution, Article 299 sub-article (a) that states that the administrators of justice shall wholly comply with the provisions of the Constitution, and Article 142 which stipulates that judges are subject to the Constitution and the law.”

The party contends that the court’s order disregarded article 111(a) of the constitution, which states that “a run-off election must be held within twenty one days after the first election.”

In his speech at the Raalhugadu protest site last night, Speaker of Parliament Abdulla Shahid asserted that the Supreme Court did not have the authority to override “any article of the constitution or even a letter of that article.”

Constitutional provisions could only be suspended by the president after declaring a state of emergency, Shahid explained, which has to first be approved by parliament.

Suspension of lawyers

In June 2012, lawyers held a crisis meeting following the publication by the Supreme Court of controversial regulations requiring all practicing lawyers to be registered at a court.

The regulations also authorised the courts to suspend lawyers for publicly criticising the judiciary or court decisions.

In February 2013, the Supreme Court suspended lawyer Abdulla Haseen after he criticised the judiciary on the MDP-aligned 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 (PGO) however decided not to prosecute Haseen after police concluded its investigation.

Moreover, earlier this month, MDP MP Imthiyaz Fahmy was charged with contempt of court for allegedly defaming Supreme Court Justices on a Raajje TV programme.

In her report on the Maldivian judiciary, UN Special Rapporteur on the Independence of Lawyers and Judges, Gabriela Knaul, wrote that the “enforcement of compulsory registration of lawyers with the courts is also unacceptable.”

“The regulation of disciplinary measures against lawyers falls outside of the prerogative of the judiciary or any other branch of power and contradicts the principle of independence of the legal profession. During her visit, the case of a lawyer who had been indefinitely suspended by the Supreme Court for allegedly criticizing one of its judgements in public was reported to the Special Rapporteur. Such a suspension leaves no avenue for appeal and review and it represents a violation of the rights of the lawyer,” the report stated.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

EC continues run-off preparations, stresses supremacy of constitution

The Elections Commission (EC) has said it will continue with preparations for the second round of presidential elections – scheduled for September 28 – and has stressed the supremacy of the constitution following conflicting orders by the Majlis and Supreme Court on a polling date.

The Majlis passed a resolution yesterday during a heated session, ordering the Elections Commission to proceed with polls as planned, as the Jumhooree Party (JP) seeks to annul the vote at the Supreme Court.

The apex court at 9:00 pm last night issued an order indefinitely postponing the run-off until it issues a verdict.

“We have not stopped any of our preparations,” President of the Elections Commissioner Fuwad Thowfeek told the press today. He then held up the constitution, saying “The main document we must follow is the constitution. The Constitution along with the election laws and regulations states how and when to hold elections.”

Vice President Ahmed Fayaz declined to comment on which order the EC would follow, saying the commission was in discussions with the Supreme Court, Majlis, and the President’s Office on a polling date.

Fayaz also stressed the supremacy of the constitution saying, “The Supreme Court, the presidency, Majlis, state institutions – all exist through the constitution and therefore cannot act against the constitution.”

“We may receive an order to proceed with polls, we cannot throw up our hands and go to sleep. We have to be ready at any point,” Fayaz added.

Fayaz pointed to a Supreme Court ruling at 8:00 pm on February 4, 2011, in which it had ordered the EC to proceed with local council elections in Addu City the next day. At the time, the Civil Court had ordered the EC to halt polls over a dispute to provide city status to Addu Atoll.

Delaying polls would be “logistically near-impossible,” Fayaz said. Polling booths are set up in school buildings throughout the country, he explained, but schools would not be available for polling between October 5 and late November as secondary school students sit for the GCSE O’Level exams.

The court ruling to delay polls was signed by four of the seven Supreme Court Judges – Justice Abdulla Saeed, Justice Ali Hameed, Justice Adam Mohamed Abdulla, and Justice Dr Abdulla Didi.

“Based on Article 144 (b), we order the Elections Commission and other relevant state institutions to delay the second round of the presidential election scheduled for 28 September 2013 until the Supreme Court issues a verdict in this case,” the injunction read.

The EC maintains that the JP’s allegations of electoral fraud are unsubstantiated and, even if proven, would still be insufficient to affect the outcome of the first round election results.

Meanwhile, the Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) – whose candidate Mohamed Nasheed polled first on September 7 – have taken to the streets in protest, having previously made clear that it would not allow a Supreme Court bench “consisting of disgraced judges accused of lewd conduct” to “abrogate the will of the people.”

Supreme Court Judge Ali Hameed has been implicated in a series of sex videos, but the judicial oversight body Judicial Services Commission (JSC) decided not to suspend the judge – against the advice of  a subcommittee it set up to investigate the matter.

The JP’s presidential candidate Gasim Ibrahim was a member of the JSC at the time of this decision.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Supreme Court ejects lawyer defending Elections Commission

Additional reporting by Leah Malone, JJ Robinson

Lawyers defending the Elections Commission (EC) and representing the Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) were today ejected from the Supreme Court, for criticising its order to indefinitely delay the second round of presidential elections.

The EC’s lawyer, former Attorney General Husnu Suood, was reportedly accused of contempt of court and removed from court.

The MDP’s legal team, including lawyers Hisaan Hussein and Hassan Latheef, who had intervened in the case as a third party (inter-partes claim), were also dismissed from today’s hearing, which was ongoing at time of press.

The Supreme Court letter posted by MDP lawyer Hisaan Hussain stated that she had been barred from appearing before the court in the ongoing Jumhooree Party (JP) versus EC case as her remarks “in the media as well as social media” had allegedly “diminished the dignity” of the court and were under investigation.

The letter also accused Hisaan of claiming that the Supreme Court order should be disregarded.

MDP MP Ahmed Hamza announced at a press conference that the party had left the Supreme Court case as a third party, as it “no longer believed justice would be served by the court.”

Hamza noted that the suspended lawyers were not allowed any opportunity to defend themselves before they were barred from the apex court.

The EC has defended itself by challenging the veracity of evidence submitted by the JP alleging electoral impropriety, and stated that even were the allegations factual, they were not sufficient to impact the results of the first round.

The EC has also pointed to unanimous positive assessments of the polling by local and international observers, including the Commonwealth, EU, US, UN, India, Transparency Maldives, the Maldivian Democracy Network and the Human Rights Commission of the Maldives (HRCM).

The Supreme Court nonetheless issued the injunction last night (September 23) to delay the runoff election until it has finished looking into the JP’s alleged discrepancies.

“No recourse”

Prior to attending the case today, Suood told Minivan News that the EC had “no recourse” against the Supreme Court’s suspension of the run-off, despite there being “no legal basis” for the order that has the “constitution up in flames”.

Suood contends that the Supreme Court injunction is in breach of Article 111 of the constitution, which demands a run-off election within 21 days of a first round in which no candidate reaches over 50 percent.

While there were more “complicated” legal arguments for refuting the Supreme Court injunction, Article 111 provides the simplest example of the constitutional violation committed by the court, according to Suood.

Suood explained that there is no way to appeal the Supreme Court order or seek another judicial remedy: “There is no further recourse,” he stated.

While constitutionally the legislative or executive branches should intervene in the matter, Suood said he believed parliament must take action against the Supreme Court.

“Parliament needs to re-convene and decide [what actions to take],” said Suood. “However parliament cannot take decisions [right now] because of the [divisive] politics within it.”

Disorderly protests by MPs of the government-aligned Progressive Party of Maldives (PPM) and JP stymied, but failed to stop, an MDP resolution to ensure that the second round of the presidential election is held as scheduled.

Suood however explained that it would be “very, very difficult” to remove the judges sitting on the Supreme Court bench, not only because of political polarisation creating unrest within Parliament, but also due to the politicised composition of the Judicial Service Commission (JSC).

“The JSC would need to issue a motion [to remove a judge or judges], which would then need the approval of Parliament, but the JSC Chair is also Supreme Court judge,” noted Suood.

The JSC recently decided to reject a proposed no-confidence motion against its Chair, Supreme Court Justice Adam Mohamed, filed by commission member Shuaib Abdul Rahman.

“The JSC is out of control right now, we must do something. The JSC president is ‘out of the circle’,” Parliament’s Independent Institutions Committee Member and MDP MP Ahmed Sameer previously told Minivan News.

The Supreme Court bench consists of seven judges, all of whom discussed the ruling against the EC, however the injunction was signed by four: Justice Abdulla Saeed, Justice Ali Hameed Mohamed, Justice Adam Mohamed Abdulla, and Justice Dr Abdulla Didi.

Meanwhile, during the MDP’s National Council meeting last night (September 23) the party’s presidential candidate and former President Mohamed Nasheed reassured supporters “not to worry”.

“The Maldives is changing, and it will change according to how we want it to. I call on the Election Commissioner to ignore the Supreme Court, and to obey Majlis resolution and hold elections on Saturday,” said Nasheed.

Following the Supreme Court’s decision to accept the Jumhooree Party’s case against the Elections Commission last week, the MDP released a statement indicating its resolve to “not allow a courthouse that consists of some disgraced judges who face allegations of lewd conduct to abrogate the will of the people and disrupt the constitution”.

Meanwhile, the MDP demonstrated at the Supreme Court today behind police cordons further down the street, after the party’s pledge to continue direct action until the presidential run-off is re-scheduled.

Women on the front line held aloft cartoons mocking Supreme Court Justice Ali Hameed – one of four judges whose name appeared on yesterday’s ruling – for his infamous role in a sex tape scandal earlier this year.

Others brandished pictures depicting the large pair of white underpants – a reference to the same video – that have quickly become emblematic of the demonstrations.


Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Scattered protests erupt in capital after MDP declares continuous protests against election postponement

Additional reporting by Zaheena Rasheed and Mariyath Mohamed

The Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) has declared it will hold continuous protests after the Supreme Court’s sudden decision on Monday (September 23) evening to indefinitely postpone the second round of the presidential election.

The Supreme Court’s controversial injunction came just hours after parliament passed a resolution calling on all state institutions to ensure that the second round of the presidential election be held as scheduled.

Scattered protests involving hundreds of people erupted across the capital city of Male’ after the MDP’s National Council unanimously supported a motion calling for demonstrations until the Supreme Court allowed the elections to proceed.

During the meeting, MDP presidential candidate Mohamed Nasheed, who obtained 45.45 percent of the votes in the first round of polling on September 7, urged the Elections Commission (EC) to disregard the Supreme Court’s ruling in favour of parliament’s resolution and continue with election preparations.

“The Chief Justice has to find a solution. I call on the Chief Justice to uphold his duties,” Nasheed said, asking police to support the EC and the military “to keep us safe”.

Speaker of Parliament Abdulla Shahid confirmed to Minivan News that he was pepper sprayed by police while several MDP MPs, including Ali Azim and Mohamed ‘Bonda’ Rasheed, were reportedly taken away by police. Rasheed was reportedly released while Azim was taken into police custody.

Police Spokesperson Chief Inspector Hassan Haneef could not confirm the number of arrests, whether pepper spray was used, or provide further details at time of press.

Maldives National Defence Force (MNDF) spokesperson Colonel Abdul Raheem confirmed to Minivan News that military personnel had been deployed around the military’s headquarters following the Supreme Court’s election injunction, in line with “standard procedure”.

Demonstrators initially tried to enter Republic Square before being pushed back by a dozen police and being barricaded near Fareedhee Magu. Minivan News observed a small number of police equipped with riot gear on standby nearby.

A group protesters were observed hanging a large pair of white underpants on a police barricade, a reference to recently-leaked videos of Supreme Court judge Ali Hameed apparently fornicating with unidentified foreign women in a Colombo hotel room.

“This is not acceptable. The people’s voice cannot be blatantly rejected by four disgraced judges,” said 33 year-old Ahmed Thahseen, a demonstrator near Fareedhee Magu.

“I’m not going home until the Supreme Court gives a ruling and lets people have the due election,” 23 year-old protester Aishath Shaffa told Minivan News.

“Let’s see how that disgrace of a politican Gasim runs his businesses when the electorate goes on strike. The people are what matters. We are everything and the Supreme Court Needs to realise that,” said 52 year-old protester Fathimath Shareefa.

“The Supreme Court order is an absolutely unacceptable act. After all the work we have done, the protests, the campaigns, we won’t watch it all go to waste,” said Ahmed ‘Gahaa’ Saeed, the MDP’s member on the Commission of National Inquiry (CONI), who joined the protesters.

“If you look at all the statements given at CONI which have since been leaked, you will see the injustice that people have faced. We are being pushed back to square one all over again and the people refuse to sit back and take it,” he added. “We are here filled with hope. There is another force and I believe truth will prevail.”

The controversial injunction

Jumhooree Party (JP) presidential candidate and resort tycoon, Gasim Ibrahim, initially filed a case in the Supreme Court seeking annulment of the election results after he narrowly missed a place in the run-off with 24.07 percent of the vote, declaring at a rally that “God Willing, Gasim will be President on November 11″.

The case was intervened by the Progressive Party of the Maldives (PPM) and Attorney General Azima Shukoor, both of which sided against the Elections Commission.

The EC has defended itself arguing that not only had the JP had failed to substantiate or give the specifics of any evidence of fraudulent voting submitted against it, but even if this evidence were to be proven beyond reasonable doubt it was still insufficient to affect the outcome of the first round of election results.

The commission also pointed to unanimous positive assessments of the first round polls by local and international election observers, including the Commonwealth, US, UN, and Transparency Maldives.

In response President Mohamed Waheed’s government called on international groups to “help, not hinder the state institutions in exercising their constitutional duties”, while JP running mate and lawyer Dr Hassan Saeed declared in court that election observers “do not carry much weight”.

Monday evening’s sudden injunction stated that it had been discussed by all judges on the seven member bench, before being signed by Justice Abdulla Saeed, Justice Ali Hameed Mohamed, Justice Adam Mohamed Abdulla, and Justice Dr Abdulla Didi.

“Based on Article 144 (b), we order the Elections Commission and other relevant state institutions to delay the second round of the presidential election scheduled for 28 September 2013 until the Supreme Court issues a verdict in this case,” read the Supreme Court order.

Lawyer for the Elections Commission, former Attorney General Husnu al Suood, tweeted that the interim order by the Supreme Court “has no legal basis, and violates the constitution.”

MDP lawyer Hissan Hussein also said the Supreme Court’s order was unconstitutional, stating that the article 144 (b) it had invoked concerned the Supreme Court’s capacity to delay lower court verdicts, not elections.

Meanwhile, article 111(a) of the constitution stipulates “that a President shall be elected by over fifty percent of the votes. If no candidate obtains such majority, a run-off election must be held within twenty one days after the first election.”

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Supreme Court issues injunction indefinitely delaying election run-off

The Maldives Supreme Court has issued an injunction delaying the second round of the presidential election until it has finished looking into alleged discrepancies in the first round.

The second round had been scheduled for this coming Saturday – September 28.

“Based on Article 144 (b), we order the Elections Commission and other relevant state institutions to delay the second round of the presidential election scheduled for 28 September 2013 until the Supreme Court issues a verdict in this case,” read the Supreme Court injunction.

The ruling was discussed by all judges on the seven member bench, before being signed by Justice Abdulla Saeed, Justice Ali Hameed Mohamed, Justice Adam Mohamed Abdulla, and Justice Dr Abdulla Didi.

The decision came today just hours after Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) members held a demonstration outside the Supreme Court, brandishing stills from one of the numerous sex-tapes allegedly involving Justice Hameed.

The MDP – the party with the most votes in the first round, with 45.45 percent – reconvened the People’s Majlis in order to push for the reconstitution of the Supreme Court bench.

“We will not allow a courthouse that consists of some disgraced judges who face allegations of lewd conduct to abrogate the will of the people and disrupt the constitution,” the MDP said in a statement last week.

Despite chaotic scenes inside the Majlis yesterday, the party was able to push through a motion today calling for the second round to go ahead as scheduled.

MDP MP Hamid Abdul Ghafoor has said he was not surprised by the decision.

“The Supreme Court has gone against all common sense, international opinion and the majority of the country without any evidence to do so,” he said.

Ghafoor added that any indefinite postponement of the second round vote was unrealistic, while claiming the decision had been made by the court without any real evidence to support its decision.

The MDP said it was too early for the party to announce how it would seek to move forward on the basis of the court’s verdict today, though he said it would “likely involve direct action.”

A meeting of the party’s National Council has been announced for 10:30pm at Male’ City Hall.

Constitutional?

The court accepted the case six days ago, after the Jumhooree Party (JP) – which placed third in the first round – filed a case to annul the vote, alleging multiple discrepancies and fraud.

In a week’s worth of hearings, the complainant has still to produce concrete evidence, with the Election Commission’s lawyer – former Attorney General – Husnu Al Suood likening the case to a “fishing expedition”, alleging the JP was hoping to file another lawsuit based on any evidence collected from the current case.

The JP has rejected any assumption that an indefinite postponement to the country’s election may lead to political instability in the nation.

JP Deputy Leader Dr Ibrahim Didi said that ensuring a free and fair election was ultimately the most important factor in assuring stability within the Maldives and a “sustainable democracy” going forward.

“Political stability depends on political leaders’ actions, reactions and their party’s activities,” he said.

Progressive Party of Maldives (PPM) presidential candidate Abdulla Yameen, who was set to stand against MDP candidate Mohamed Nasheed in the run-off vote, told Minivan News there was “nothing unconstitutional” with the court verdict.

“The Elections Commission got the opportunity to argue out their case and establish the credibility of the process,” he told Minivan News.

Yameen, who came second in the first round vote with 25 percent, said the country “should elect” a president soon.

“There’s time for that.  In [the presidential election of] 2008, voting was held on October 28,” he said, arguing that a postponement would not lead to any form of political instability.

Article 144 (b) of the constitution, titled ‘powers in constitutional matters’ states that, when deciding a constitutional matter within its jurisdiction, a court may make any order that is “just and equitable”, including:

“An order suspending the declaration of invalidity (of a statute, regulation or action due to inconsistency with the Constitution) for any period and on any conditions, to allow the competent authority to correct the defect.”

Elections Commissioner Fuwad Thowfeek previously told Minivan News that the constitutional timetable for the transfer of power could not be met should the run-off be delayed.

“120 days before the end of the current president’s term a presidential election must be held. If there is no election then the [democratic] constitution, presidential and general election law will not be satisfied,” he said.

Despite the vehement criticism from sections of the media, civil society and the JP, the conduct and capability of the EC has been universally lauded by international observers.

After Commonwealth Special Envoy, Sir Donald McKinnon, this weekend joined in calls for the September 28 run-off to go ahead as schedule, the Maldives Foreign Office warned international observers to “help, not hinder” the state’s institutions.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Supreme Court continues collecting statements from Jumhooree Party witnesses

The Supreme Court today (September 23) continued taking statements from witnesses produced by the Jumhoree Party (JP), in the party’s ongoing bid to annul the first round of presidential elections over allegations of discrepancies and irregularities in the voting process.

The Supreme Court commenced direct examination and cross examination of witnesses during last Sunday’s hearings, during which three witnesses produced by the JP gave their testimonies to the court.

During the hearing Chief Justice Ahmed Faiz announced that the JP had requested to produce 20 witnesses to give evidence in court to support their case.

Due to a request made by the JP’s lawyers on Sunday, the statements of all witnesses were taken with special arrangements made to ensure their anonymity. The witnesses gave their statements in a separate room and their voices were distorted to protect their identities.

The first witness produced by the JP told the court that his friend working as an election official had informed him that his younger sister – who lived in Malaysia and never went to vote –  had her name on the list in Male’ and which showed that she had voted.

During re-examination, EC Lawyer Husnu Al Suood asked the witness whether he knew which ballot box in which the alleged discrepancy occurred, but he refused to answer and told the judge that he would give the details “in writing” to the court.

When Hisaan Hussain, the lawyer from the opposition Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) which has intervened in the case, questioned the witness as to whether he was affiliated with any political party, the witness, despite initial reluctance, said that he supported the Dhivehi Rayyithunge Party (DRP).

The second witness, a female, told the court that she was not able to vote in the elections because EC officials had told her that her National Identity Card (NIC) number did not match with the one that was on the commission’s database. The witness reiterated that despite turning up with an official document from the Department of National Registration, EC officials refused to allow her to vote.

The third witness, a police officer who was on security duty during the time of polling, told the court that he had witnessed elections officials packing up all the paperwork on the ballot counting table – including the original ballot papers – and putting them into a cardboard box, after the officials announced the provisional results of that box.

The police officer said that once the officials had packed the box, they took it away in two taxis. He said that although he had expected them to head to Dharubaaruge, the officials instead went to the secretariat of the commission located in Maafannu.

When the EC lawyer asked the witness what his duty of the day had been, the police officer told the court that he was ordered to follow the EC officials who had left in the taxi, but did not reveal who had given him this order.

When the MDP lawyer questioned the officer as to what distance had he been from the ballot box, the officer said that he was just approximately 15 feet away from the ballot box, 85 feet closer than the 100 foot distance police officers are regulated to maintain from the box.

A fourth witness, a female, told the court that when she contacted the EC to re-register for the run-off election, the EC officials had told her that she had already been registered to vote in Male even though she claimed that she had neither re-registered of voted during the first round of elections. She also contested that the EC official had told her that she had voted in Male.

Another witness told the court that when he had gone to vote, the list which the EC officials working at the ballot box were using showed his name being highlighted as if he had already voted in the election.

However, the witness claimed that following protests and complaints, the officials later allowed him to vote after manually writing down his name and details on the printed list.

During today’s hearing the court was not able to collect statements from two witnesses whose statements had to be collected through telephone.

Each of the two witnesses had appeared in their respective island’s Magistrate Courts to give their witness through telephone. However due to poor reception the court was not able to obtain their statements.

The Chief Justice said that testimonies of the two witnesses would be taken in the next hearing.

After the collection of evidences by witnesses, the JP Lawyer Dr Hassan Saeed requested the Supreme Court give it the party the opportunity to present two new documents of evidence, which included a new list of fraudulent voters and a copy of the leaked police intelligence report currently being circulated around social media.

In response to the request, the judges said that the leaked document could only be accepted after discussing the matter with the other judges. However Deputy Solicitor General Ahmed Usham – who was representing the state, which had also intervened into the case – requested the court for permission to present the original intelligence report to the court, citing that the one that had been leaked on social media had been a part of the original report.

In concluding the hearing today, Chief Justice Faiz said that during the next hearing that the court would try to obtain the statements of the two witnesses, whose statements the court was not able to collect today.

Faiz did not state the date when the next hearing would be scheduled.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Q&A: Elections Commission Chairperson Fuwad Thowfeek

The Maldives’ Elections Commission (EC) is preparing for the presidential election’s second round run-off amidst the Jumhooree coalition’s refusal to accept its first round defeat, triggering a barrage of judicial, political, media and civil society actions against the commission.

The Jumhooree Party (JP) – in conjunction with the Attorney General (AG) and the Progressive Party of the Maldives (PPM) – has led a Supreme Court case to annul the election, whilst the party’s High Court case against the commission was conducted in tandem. In response to the JP’s vote fraud claims the police barricaded the EC secretariat and searched its garbage, while multiple protests and threats have targeted  the commission and its members and local media has broadcast unsubstantiated information about the commission and electoral process.

The EC has emphatically dismissed allegations of vote rigging as “baseless and unfounded”, highlighting its transparency and extensive preparations – conducted with international support – to ensure a free and fair polling process. International election observers have unanimously commended the first round of polling, calling for losing parties to accept defeat and allow the second round to proceed as scheduled.

With the September 28 run-off less than a week away, Minivan News discusses some of the challenges faced by the commission with Fuwad Thowfeek, Chairperson of the country’s first independent Elections Commission (EC).

Supreme Court case

Leah R Malone: Considering the politicised nature of the Supreme Court – as highlighted by the UN Special Rapporteur for the Independence of Judges and Lawyers, Gabriela Knaul – is there a risk the Supreme Court’s order to hand over the EC’s only original copy of the voter list could lead to it being tampered with? Specifically, given the lack of material evidence or witnesses presented against the EC thus far, is there a potential opportunity for names to be added to the original voter list to substantiate the JP’s claims?

Fuwad Thowfeek: Thursday (September 19) the Supreme Court ordered the Elections Commission provide the original voter list, so we’ve been making color copies. EC members sat down and discussed [the situation], the constitution and presidential election laws, as well as met with our legal team. Since it’s a Supreme Court case they can order anything be given, so it’s best to follow that order [and provide the list].

However our legal team advised us to take very accurate color copies of each page before sending the originals. We are keeping the duplicates and in case any changes are made [to the originals] we will very easily be able to recognise them. It is the best solution we have at the moment.

As of about 3:45pm or 4:00pm Friday (September 20) we sent 120 lists to the Supreme Court. 200 will be sent Saturday and the day after the remaining lists. We are sending the original documents as the copies are being made.

LRM: If the Supreme Court rules to annul the presidential election’s first round, what will the Elections Commission do?

FT: That’s a big question because according to the constitution and even elections law there is nothing said [about whether the Supreme Court can take that action]. We have to ask the Supreme Court to give a timetable or something [for the presidential election]. Other than that there’s nothing we can do.

We won’t be able to fulfill the time requirement set forth in the constitution [if the run-off isn’t held on schedule]. 120 days before the end of the current president’s term a presidential election must be held. If there is no election then the [democratic] constitution, presidential and general election law will not be satisfied.

The strangest, funniest thing is that they are still not able to identify a single person who has voted fraudulently. For example, they have not been able to show anyone who is younger than 18 has voted, but they have been claiming many underage people fraudulently voted. If there are many [that voted fraudulently] they should be able to verify and show at least one person. They are also claiming that dead people voted, and when they submitted the list of seven names to the High Court, the court gave us the list to check. So we reviewed the voter registry and voter list, found phone numbers on record for four people and when we spoke with them, the individuals verified they were indeed alive and had voted. We are sure we will be able to find the remaining three people.

The other thing is if a dead person voted, someone should be able to show that this is the person who voted under the deceased’s name. Also, the JP is claiming 50,000 fraudulent votes have been added. The strangest thing is none of these ballots have been identified. No ballot boxes were found to have more votes cast than voters registered. Only one ballot box – located on a resort island – was found to have exactly 100 percent voter turnout. The average voter turnout was 88.44 percent nationwide.

LRM: Has Attorney General Azima Shukoor been in contact with the Elections Commission?

FT: That was another surprise to us actually. She has not been in contact with us and then suddenly appeared in the Supreme Court case. The funniest thing is the AG is supposed to support government institutions, but in this case the AG is speaking against the EC. She is supporting JP without evidence or witnesses, just saying there were errors in the voters list, but is not able to cite what those specific errors are because she has not seen [or requested to see] the list.

When I heard the AG was going to participate in the Supreme Court case, I thought it would be on behalf of the EC and she would tell the court [the vote rigging allegations are] simply not possible and the court cannot give any room to cancel the first round and re-hold it. [However,] when the AG came out and spoke against the EC – just like any political party supporter of JP – we released a press statement stating that the commission regrets this action by the AG. Both the AG and the JP have not provided any evidence or witnesses to support their allegations.

The government has spent over MVR 30 million (US $1,949,310) on the first round, there is no budget remaining [to hold both rounds again]. If it’s difficult for the government to provide the additional budget for the second round, there will be so many difficulties if the [results are annulled and] voting rounds are held again.

[Prior to the Supreme Court case] we hadn’t had much contact with the office of the AG or the AG. Last year after the change of government, in March or April, the EC met with the AG and spoke about changes that were required in the election laws, but nothing has materialised so far. She told us at the time that there were so many laws requiring revision.

Before the end of the last Supreme Court session, the Chief Justice ordered the EC to submit the original copy of the voters’ list. They are probably going to check the list to see whether people below the age of 18 voted. If they want to check for that, it’s fine. We are 100 percent sure they will not find anyone below 18 who voted.

Accessing the voter list

LRM: Following the High Court order for the EC to allow JP access to the voter list – under the guidelines determined by the commission – what were the exact protocol guidelines the EC enacted during the JP representative’s visit? What other political party representatives were present?

FT: Tuesday (September 17) the High Court ordered the EC to show the voter list to political parties. We have only one original [copy of the voters list] and had to make arrangements to follow the High Court’s order to show JP [the list], so we made the arrangements for Thursday (September 19).

This was because the EC needed time to prepare, seek advice from our legal team, and to hold a discussion meeting with our members. At the same time, arrangements for other candidates to see the voter list were also made. We invited all four political parties to send representatives to see the original voter list.

The viewing started at 10:00am. A team from JP came and GIP, but no PPM – even in court they said they did not want to see the voter list. An MDP representative came, but he said he did not want to see it.

We asked the other two – representatives from JP and GIP – what they wanted to see. Then again they wanted more people [from their parties] to come and for the EC to make copies [of the list for them]. But we couldn’t make that arrangement because we have to be very careful with our only copy [of the list], so our own official would show it to one representative at a time. There were arguments from the political party representatives [about these guidelines].

[However,] the lawyer, Dr Hassan Saeed [JP presidential candidate Gasim Ibrahim’s running mate and head of JP’s legal team] said that now he does not need to look at the voter list anymore because he would prefer for the EC to hand it over to the Supreme Court.

(JP’s Legal Advisor Mohamed Haleem told Minivan News last week that the party would seek an additional High Court order for unrestricted access to the voter list).

LRM: With the ‘leaked’ police intelligence report – which the AG is citing in the Supreme Court – alleging there were “some opportunities for fraud” and “illegal voting”, the AG arguing for the Supreme Court to order the police to investigate the EC, and the police barricading and searching the EC’s garbage, do you think the police are politicised and acting against the EC?

FT: I don’t think anything will happen. I heard the AG demanded the PG issue an order to the police to investigate some of these allegations, but so far the commission has not been contacted by the police or the PG. But we don’t know anything about this. The AG should have met and spoke with the EC before making such a decision and then advising another institution [to take action].

LRM: What has been the outcome of the Maldives Broadcasting Commission (MBC)’s investigation into Villa TV (VTV) broadcasting programmes to incite hatred and create an uprising against the EC? Have any substantive actions been taken by MBC against VTV?

FT: We don’t know about the [outcome of the] MBC investigation. They said they will be taking actions against those broadcasting untruthful content. We know that VTV has stopped broadcasting the ‘Olhuvaalee Vote Ge Namugai’ (‘fraud in the name of the vote’) programme. But for a very long time they have been showing ‘Fasmanzaru’ (‘five horizons’), where various JP political party members or supporters just talk against the EC or against the election’s first round. Although what they have to say has no substance.

Saturday or Sunday we have to send a complaint letter to MBC. Again I have called MBC’s President Mohamed Shahyb and by phone have spoken to him about ‘Fasmanzaru’ [and the unsubstantiated claims its spreading].

LRM: How will the EC provide more timely information to media during the second round run-off to avoid the confusion created by inaccurate local media reports of polling station figures during the first round?

FT: We have not yet decided. I think we need more frequent refreshing of figures and will try to have more frequent reports from the EC on the 28th. If everything does not go well it may be difficult… we may not be able to go to the Dharubaaruge [convention centre in Male’]. We will try to have better updates through the internet, but will be focusing on communicating directly with the media.

Threats and protests

LRM: The ‘National Movement’ has announced they will raise their voices in protest if the Supreme Court doesn’t rule against the EC. They are calling for the EC to be reformed – with yourself, the Vice Chair Ahmed Fayaz, and commission member Ali Mohamed Manik resigning. Have previous JP protests and planned National Movement protests caused any problems for the EC? Why are they targeting the three of you?

FT: Even JP supporters – except the 20 or 30 people shouting on the streets – have accepted the first round results and are not causing any problems.

Thursday night around 10:30pm 20 or 30 protesters came near the EC Secretariat, shouted for 30 minutes and left. They were demanding my resignation and saying ‘thief of votes’ and that type of thing, they wanted the [first round] results cancelled and a fresh election to be held. Sometimes they ask for myself and the Vice Chair to resign, sometimes different EC members, and sometimes the entire commission.

These are a few unsatisfied people paid by somebody – who has the money – but they know they’re not shouting for any solid thing. They get on a loudspeaker [and protest] after somebody asks or pays them – they are doing it for that reason alone, not based on anything reasonable. If it was a public thing then I’d be more concerned. But this is just a few people and most are not educated. They don’t know what’s going on [with the election] or how the voting process works.

There are five members of the EC and all decisions are made by the five members. [However,] the Vice Chair Fayaz, member Manik, and I are the three members interacting the most with the public, on TV etc  – that’s why they are going against us.

LRM: What kind of threats have been made against EC members and/or staff?

FT: Some of us are getting threats from unknown people. I have received SMS messages saying ‘be careful when you come out on the street, you’ll be stabbed in the stomach’. We [commission members] have security provided by the police and we move around with them.

My wife has been scared. Two times people went near our home shouting [and protesting], but the police protected our home and stopped the people from coming too near.

LRM: Do you think the MPS can provide adequate security for EC members?

FT: Yes, the MPS is fully capable. I’m sure nobody can harm me. They have to look at a distance but can’t touch me. Of that I’m fully confident, I’m not scared. I’m confidant know what I’m doing is right and I have the support of the people and the whole international community – observers and monitors. They’ve seen the electoral process [during the first round], which they have commended, praised, and complemented. I’m very happy and am moving ahead with my duties. My work cannot be stopped by a few people. I have full confidence in myself and am moving ahead.

LRM: The JP, some of their supporters, and the National Movement have claimed the EC, its members and staff are biased toward MDP – will you clarify for the public whether there is any truth in this accusation?

FT: There’s no truth to that, it’s some kind of story that some of the opponents wanted to spread. This commission, all its members and staff, do not belong to any political party or align with any political party.

We have staff who are married to people from different political parties – PPM, MDP, DRP, etc – and police officers. Staff members’ spouses may belong to a political party, but that is their own interest and has nothing to do with the duties of our staff. I have full confidence in our staff, they are very faithful to their duties and this commission and would not do anything unjust. I’m confident in my staff and that none are aligned with the MDP.

If they [a particular politician or political party] don’t get the result they want from a particular institution, they tend to claim that institution is opposition-aligned. The MDP got the best result [Nasheed secured 45.45 percent of the vote], so this time the EC is accused of being MDP aligned. If Yameen won then the EC would be accused of being PPM aligned.

In another instance, right after the change of government [in February 2012] some said the Human Rights Commission of the Maldives (HRCM) was PPM aligned, because most of the decisions made were more likely to the advantage of PPM. That’s just the kind of talk that happens.

Run-off preparations

LRM: What kind of support are local and international partners providing the EC for the second round? Is anything additional needed prior to the run-off scheduled for the 28th?

FT: We are getting a lot of support from international and local partners. The Commonwealth has expressed their satisfaction with the EC’s professionalism and their continued support for the commission. They will be sending another observer team for the run-off. The EU sent different observer teams – from various countries – on the 7th and will most likely send more for the 28th. Observers from Japan, Thailand, India, UK, US, and a Pakistani Elections Commissioner were present during the first round and expressed their interest in observing the second round. They will most likely send more teams for the run-off. I think they will come before the 28th to see the place, visit other islands, and see how ready we are for the second round.

Transparency Maldives sent the observers nationwide and their report praised the electoral process. The HRCM also observed the first round and praised us on our work and confirmed everything during the election went well. The Maldivian Democracy Network also expressed their support and commended the work the EC has done.

LRM: How have EC members, staff, and their families been impacted by the controversy the commission has faced since the first round? How has this impacted run-off election preparations?

FT: Right now there is very heavy work we have left to do before the 28th. We are so busy we are working 24 hours a day and the EC staff works in shifts, half are sent home to sleep when the other half report in.

For example, in addition to the 470 ballot boxes necessary for the first round, the second round will require an additional box be placed in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, and two more on tourist resorts that have applied to keep ballot boxes this round.

Everyone of us has to spend so much time in the office. We go early in the morning and stay until late at night, even on weekends, while our families are alone at home. Our families suffer, but they fully support us so we can fulfill our national duty.

It’s a very difficult job but I’m lucky to have the confidence of the people and [political party] leaders – even Gasim’s close people, President Waheed and President Nasheed know me well, and the honorable Yameen and Gayoom know and trust me. Even those who speak against me only speak for political gain or just to control their supporters.

I know what I’m doing is right and everything will be fine for elections to take place the 28th. We are fully ready for the second round. If we are able to hold on until the 28th then we will know the next president of the country.

LRM: Given the barrage of judicial, political, media and civil society actions against the EC, is the electoral environment still conducive to holding a free and fair presidential election on September 28?

FT: I think on the 28th of September the second round will go ahead as we have planned and have been working toward. There has been very little or no change [in the electoral environment] that would require we make any changes to our own program. Compared to last week, this week things have very much improved. I’m very confident things will calm down.

I’ve spoken to different people [representing political parties] and the most interesting thing is even those against us in the Supreme Court, they know there was nothing wrong with the election. Gasim’s employees, senior political party members, are trying to just give him a perspective that they did so much to cover up their failure to get Gasim the required number of votes [to proceed to the run-off]. They know the cases submitted in the High Court and Supreme Court are not going to give them any recount. Nothing will come out in their favour. They just want to go as far as they can go.

A lot of energy has been wasted by everyone – their people, our people, the Supreme Court.

I’m very hopeful the country will be ready for the run-off. We cannot keep this second round [from happening on schedule]. Particularly for the benefit of the country, to maintain the peace and harmony of our home [nation], we have to hold the second round.

If we fail, we will likely face more and more problems as the time passes. It will be in the interest of the government, all political parties, and all thoughtful citizens of the country to hold the run-off. Anybody trying to obstruct the election is unpatriotic.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)