Tag: terrorism

Nasheed denies ordering Judge Abdulla arrest, granted three days to answer charges

Former President Mohamed Nasheed has denied ordering Criminal Court Chief Judge Abdulla Mohamed’s arrest at the second hearing of a surprise terrorism trial.

“As President of the Maldives, I did not order any harm unto or the arrest of any citizen,” the opposition leader told the Criminal Court tonight.

“These are politically motivated charges, an atrocity planned and carried out by the government,” he said.

Nasheed said he had no hope of a free and fair trial, noting that the Prosecutor General (PG) Muhthaz Muhsin and two of the three judges presiding over his trial were among the state’s witnesses.

Addressing Judges Abdulla Didi and Abdul Bari Yoosuf, Nasheed said: “You saw this very closely. You are his [Judge Abdulla’s] colleagues. I do not see how you, by the Islamic Shari’ah, Maldivian laws and international laws, could deliver an impartial verdict.”

Tonight’s hearing ended with the Criminal Court granting Nasheed three extra days to prepare his defence, after his lawyers claimed they had not had adequate time to research and review the state’s charges and evidence.

The opposition leader was arrested on Sunday ahead of a surprise hearing on terrorism the next day. The Criminal Court had denied him legal representation at the time and ruled he be kept in police custody until the end of the trial.

“Politically motivated atrocity”

Before the hearing began, Nasheed and his four-member legal team complained over seating arrangements which separated the former president from his lawyers. The former president requested to be seated among his lawyers to be allowed to confer with them easily.

The three-judge panel refused to change the setup, but did allow lawyers to approach the defence stand and consult with Nasheed throughout the trial.

In his opening remarks, Nasheed pointed out PG Muhthaz Muhsin, a former Criminal Court judge, was Judge Abdulla Mohamed’s colleague. Muhsin had withdrawn lesser charges submitted by former  PG Ahmed Muizz and asked Nasheed be prosecuted under a harsher terror law.

Nasheed is now being tried under the 1990 Anti Terrorism Act, which considers abductions, kidnapping and attempts to do so as acts of terror.

Muhsin’s decision to re-prosecute demonstrated the political nature of the charges, Nasheed contended.

The PG raises criminal charges on behalf of the public to ensure public safety, Nasheed continued, stating: “Public support for me during the presidential elections, 49 percent, demonstrate they do not view me as a terrorist.”

“My concern is not on damages I would be caused, but on the dark shadow [this trial] would cast on Maldives’ future,” he added.

Noting the Criminal Court had denied him legal representation at a first hearing, and ruled he be held in pre-trial detention, Nasheed said: “What I’m seeing is that you are unable to or face great difficulty in ensuring a fair trial.”

The three judges did not respond to Nasheed’s statements, and upon his request asked lawyers to proceed with his defence.

Lawyer Abdulla Shaairu then held up a thick sheaf of papers and said the legal team had not had adequate time to prepare a defence. In the three days granted previously, lawyers were only able to skim through documents and needed more time to clarify the exact nature of charges, he added.

Judge Didi agreed, and adjourned the hearing. Judge Sujau Usman is the third member of the Criminal Court panel.

In a statement earlier this week, PG Muhsin said there were no legal obstacles to pressing terrorism charges. Meanwhile, the ruling Progressive Party of the Maldives (PPM) insists it has no influence over the independent PG and independent courts.

Nasheed’s trial demonstrates “no one is above the law,” PPM MPs have claimed.

Judge Mohamed’s detention in January 2012 triggered three weeks of nightly protests, culminating in a police and army mutiny forcing Nasheed’s resignation.

Manhandled

Nasheed appeared in court on Monday with his arm in a makeshift sling after a scuffle in which police manhandled the former president as he attempted to speak with journalists outside the Justice Building.

The EU, UN, Commonwealth, US, India, Canada and UK have expressed concern over Nasheed’s arrest, subsequent terrorism charges and denial of legal representation.

Current Defence Minister Moosa Ali Jaleel, then-Defence Minister Tholhath Ibrahim, MDP MP and retired Brigadier General Ibrahim Mohamed Didi and retired Colonel Mohamed Ziyad are also facing terrorism charges over the judge’s detention.

All have pleaded not guilty to charges.

On Tuesday, Nasheed’s lawyers named presiding Judges Abdulla Didi and Abdul Bari Yoosuf as witnesses, noting the pair had been present with Judge Mohamed at the time of his arrest, and requested they withdraw from the bench.

Nasheed’s trial comes shortly after the MDP and former ruling coalition partner Jumhooree Party allied against what they call President Abdulla Yameen’s repeated violations of the constitution.

The allied opposition parties have planned mass demonstrations for tomorrow (February 27) and have pledged to topple Yameen’s administration.

Related to this story

Former President Nasheed arrives in court with arm in makeshift sling

Nasheed denied right to appoint lawyer and appeal “arbitrary” arrest warrant, contend lawyers

Police arrest former President Mohamed Nasheed ahead of terrorism trial

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Nasheed arrest “domestic matter” for Maldives: Chinese Foreign Ministry

Former President Mohamed Nasheed’s arrest and trial on terrorism charges is a “domestic matter” for the Maldives and the Chinese government would not interfere, Chinese Ministry of Foreign Affairs’ Spokesperson Hong Lei has said.

The spokesperson was asked at a regular press conference on Wednesday (February 25) about China’s view on the situation.

“The issue you asked is the domestic matter of the Maldives. China upholds the principle of non-interference in other countries’ domestic affairs. We believe the Maldivian side can deal with its domestic affairs properly,” Hong Lei replied.

Following Nasheed’s arrest and surprise trial on terrorism charges, the Commonwealth, India, Canada, UN and the EU issued statements expressing concern with the developments in the Maldives.

However, Foreign Minister Dunya Maumoon dismissed the statements as biased and factually inaccurate.

“The Government of President Abdulla Yameen Abdul Gayoom will not take instructions from a foreign government on any issue in governing the country,” she said.

In his address to the nation on the occasion of Republic Day (November 11) last year, President Abdulla Yameen slammed “Western colonial powers” and declared his administration was “looking East” towards China.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

EU, UN join international chorus of concern over Nasheed’s arrest, terrorism trial

The United Nations (UN) and European Union (EU) have joined a growing international chorus of concern over former President Mohamed Nasheed’s arrest and surprise trial on terrorism charges.

In a statement today, the UN urged “fairness and transparency in regards to the legal proceedings” against the former president.

The Assistant Secretary-General for Political Affairs, Jens Toyberg-Frandzen in a telephone conversation with Foreign Minister Dunya Maumoon, “stressed the need for full respect for due process and transparency” in Nasheed’s trial.

He also appealed to the government to allow peaceful political dissent and to engage with the opposition in the interest of long-term political stability in the Maldives, the statement read.

At a first hearing yesterday, a visibly injured Nasheed appeared in court with his arm in a makeshift sling and repeatedly asked for medical attention and legal counsel.

Presiding Judge Abdulla Didi denied Nasheed bail and gave him three days to appoint a lawyer and answer charges.

The former opposition leader is to remain in police custody until the conclusion of the terrorism trial over the January 2012 detention of Criminal Court Judge Abdulla Mohamed.

The EU Heads of Mission and Ambassadors of Norway and Switzerland in Colombo in a statement this evening said the delegation was “very concerned” over Nasheed’s arrest and was seeking clarification as to the nature of the terrorism charges.

“Equally, reports of former President Nasheed having effectively been denied appropriate legal representation at the court hearing on 23 February 2015, are of great concern,” the statement read.

“The EU Delegation reiterates the importance of respect for democratic principles, including respect for the rule of law, for the Constitution, for due legal process and for the independence of the judiciary.”

Foreign Minster Dunya Maumoon has hit back at the UN, and previous statements by the Commonwealth and Canada, expressing disappointment over what she called biased statements.

“Those who prefer to issue public statements about an on-going legal case, or on a domestic political situation, are advised to do a basic fact-check, before bandwagoning on to accusations made by a political party,” a press release by the Foreign Ministry this afternoon said.

Dunya insisted the police followed due process and standard procedure in arresting Nasheed and presenting him at court.

“The Government of President Abdulla Yameen Abdul Gayoom will not take instructions from a foreign government on any issue in governing the country,” she said.

She urged foreign countries and international organisations to “refrain from acts and signals that could undermine the sovereignty of independent states,” and said President Abdulla Yameen’s government “will implement to the letter, the decisions and verdicts of the Courts.”

It added that Nasheed was arrested with a court warrant and presented before a judge within 24 hours in accordance with “normal procedure,” after which the judge granted the former president the opportunity to appoint a lawyer.

However, Nasheed was brought to court more than 24 hours after the arrest for the first hearing of a trial on terrorism charges, rather than a remand hearing.

Meanwhile, the Asian Centre for Human Rights has called “upon the United States, European Union, India, Singapore and others to impose a travel embargo on Prosecutor General Muhthaz Muhsin and presiding Judge Abdulla Didi for the illegal arrest and detention of Mr Nasheed.”

“The arrest and detention of former President Nasheed on terrorism charges is a grotesque act of political vendetta. The accountability of Prosecutor General Muhsin and Presiding Judge Didi must be established, including under universal jurisdiction for meting out torture, inhumane and degrading treatment to former President Nasheed in the court premises,” stated the ACHR’s Director Suhas Chakma.

Related to this story

Foreign Minister Dunya slams Canada, Commonwealth statements on Nasheed prosecution

Commonwealth, Canada express concern over denial of legal representation for former President Nasheed

Former President Nasheed arrives in court with arm in makeshift sling

Nasheed denied right to appoint lawyer and appeal “arbitrary” arrest warrant, contend lawyers

Police arrest former President Mohamed Nasheed ahead of terrorism trial

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Nasheed’s lawyers name Judges Didi, Yoosuf as witnesses, request their withdrawal from terrorism trial

Additional reporting by Mohamed Saif Fathih and Ismail Humaam Hamid

Former President Mohamed Nasheed’s lawyers have named two of the three judges overseeing the opposition leader’s terrorism trial as witnesses, and requested the pair to excuse themselves from the bench.

In a letter to the Criminal Court today, lawyer Hassan Latheef asked Judge Abdulla Didi and Abdul Bari Yoosuf to step down, noting that the two were present with Judge Abdulla Mohamed at his residence during his arrest by the military.

The two judges witnessed the conversation between Judge Abdulla Mohamed and military officers, and could testify he had not been kidnapped as charged by the Prosecutor General, Latheef contended.

Nasheed is being prosecuted for the judge’s detention under the Prevention of Terrorism Act of 1990, which criminalises kidnappings and abductions. The offence carries a jail term between 10 and 15 years.

At a first hearing yesterday, Judge Abdulla Didi gave Nasheed three days to appoint a lawyer and answer charges. The former president is to be kept in police custody until the end of the trial.

Speaking to Minivan News, Nasheed’s lawyers continued to express concern over bureaucratic delays in both appealing the Criminal Court’s arrest warrant and registering to represent him at the next hearing on Thursday.

The Commonwealth, India, US, and Canada have expressed concern over the former president’s arrest and denial of right to legal counsel and appeal.

Medical attention

A police spokesperson confirmed to Minivan News that Nasheed was brought to Malé at 2:20pm today for medical attention upon his request. But neither his lawyers nor his family were informed. 

Nasheed limped into the courtroom yesterday using his tie as a makeshift sling for his arm. He claimed police officers had broken his arm and repeatedly asked for immediate medical attention.

The Maldives Police Services’ Superintendent Hamdhoon Rasheed denied allegations of police brutality last night, claiming Nasheed had staged his own fall.

Rasheed said Nasheed’s fingers and arms were not hurt according to doctors at the Dhoonidhoo Island Detention Center.

Nasheed’s legal team said they are not certain if police had arranged for an x-ray as advised by the doctor.

A police spokesperson declined to comment on the matter, stating: “medical assistance and attention will be given to all detainees under police custody.”

Nasheed’s lawyers have now requested Home Minister Umar Naseer to transfer him to house arrest.

“We are extremely concerned about the safety and security of President Nasheed, especially after what we saw yesterday in front of the court house. The police brutalised President Nasheed in front of the press and he is physically hurt,” Latheef said.

Judge Didi ordered the police to provide Nasheed appropriate medical care while he remains in custody.

Appeal delayed

Lawyers were unable to appeal the Criminal Court issued arrest warrant today as the forms required Nasheed’s signatures and had to be submitted to the Criminal Court before noon.

New appeal regulations state appeals of any court ruling must be first submitted to the court responsible for issuing the ruling. The court would then forward the forms to the appellate court.

Nasheed’s five-member legal team attempted to file an appeal on Monday, but were unable to do so due to the Criminal Court’s failure to provide the forms.

Lawyers said the Supreme Court’s new regulations impede the right to appeal as enshrined in the constitution.

The opposition Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) has meanwhile requested the Human Rights Commission of the Maldives (HRCM) to investigate the police’s treatment of the former president, his arrest and proceedings of the terrorism trial.

HRCM member Jeehan Mahmoud confirmed the commission’s staff had visited the former president at Dhoonidhoo last night, but declined to give further details.

In a statement condemning the police’s unlawful use of force yesterday, the HRCM also called on the police to provide Nasheed with medical attention immediately and ensure he is afforded all constitutional rights.

The Police Integrity Commission was not responding to calls at the time of press.

Speaking to Minivan News, a spokesperson from the Prosecutor General’s Office today insisted the office was following due process in charging Nasheed with terrorism.

The PG’s office had initially charged Nasheed with arbitrary detention under the soon to be outdated Penal Code, but withdrew charges on February 15 for further review.

A statement issued on Sunday said Prosecutor General Muhuthaz Muhsin had decided “the best way [forward] in this case is to change the charges raised against Mohamed Nasheed and the court in which it was filed”.

“Therefore, as the case against Mohamed Nasheed is in the court process, we note that it is not desirable for politicians, some members of the public, political parties, and some media to talk in a way that both creates anxiety among the public about verdicts issued by courts and causes loss of confidence in independent institutions created by the constitution,” read the statement.

Related to this story:

Police deny brutalising Nasheed

Commonwealth, Canada express concern over denial of legal representation for former President Nasheed

Former President Nasheed arrives in court with arm in makeshift sling

Nasheed denied right to appoint lawyer and appeal “arbitrary” arrest warrant, contend lawyers

Police arrest former President Mohamed Nasheed ahead of terrorism trial

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Police deny brutalising Nasheed

The Maldives Police Services have denied former President Mohamed Nasheed was brutalised when he was escorted into the Criminal Court yesterday.

Speaking to the press last night, Superintendent of Police Hamdhoon Rasheed said the opposition leader had staged a fall, and that his arms and fingers were not injured as he had claimed in the courtroom.

“When he fell and started to show resistance, the police attempted to ensure he received no injuries in taking him inside the courtroom,” he said.

Nasheed appeared in court for a terrorism trial with his arm in a makeshift sling. The opposition leader asked for immediate medical attention and right to legal counsel.

He had been arrested on Sunday on a court order that claimed he might abscond from the terrorism trial scheduled for the next day. Nasheed is being re-prosecuted on terrorism charges over the detention of Criminal Court Chief Judge Abdulla Mohamed in January 2012.

Criminal Court Judge Abdulla Didi placed Nasheed in detention until the end of the trial and gave him three days to appoint a lawyer and answer charges.

Superintendent Rasheed also alleged politicians were calling up individual police officers and offering “large amounts of money” as bribes to carry out “certain activities” and leak information on investigations.

Injured

Nasheed had arrived at the Justice Building at 4:00pm under a heavy Specialist Operations (SO) police guard. When journalists attempted to question the former president, SO officers surrounded and manhandled him.

Minivan News journalists observed Nasheed repeatedly asking the police to pull back, saying he will walk into the court room on his own accord.

Nasheed fell down and his shirt was torn in the process.

The opposition Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) issued a statement last night condemning police brutality against the party’s president, claiming President Abdulla Yameen had directed the police’s actions.

“Police physically injured Nasheed when they took him into the Criminal Court on Presidents Yameen’s administration’s orders following his unlawful he was arrested against the constitution, regulations and international standards in making arrests,” the statement read.

Speaking at a press conference last night, MDP Chairperson Ali Waheed said that the party’s leadership was extremely worried over the former president’s safety.

MDP’s Vice Chairman Ali Shiyam had shared concerns with the Human Rights Commission of the Maldives, he said.

“President Nasheed urges people to cross the boundary of fear and to come out on February 27,” Waheed said.

Stunts

Speaking on TVM’s “Maldives Today” programme last night, Presidential Affairs Minister Mohamed ‘Mundhu’ Hussein Shareef accused Nasheed of playing “stunts” in order to get international media attention and said such incidents tarnished Maldives’ image.

He claimed the government was not under any international pressure, saying expressions of concern by international organizations and foreign countries “do not amount to pressure.”

Nasheed as commander-in-chief had “kidnapped” Judge Abdulla Mohamed, Mundhu said, arguing: “When the case begins in a court, how can it be called a political act in a society that believes offenders must be tried?”

Meanwhile, Tourism Minister Ahmed Adeeb, speaking alongside Mundhu, said President Yameen would not interfere with the Prosecutor General’s Office or the judiciary.

“We are not like President Nasheed’s administration. We would not lock up the Supreme Court or the Majlis or disappear politicians. In our administration, the police will not act without a court order,” the ruling Progressive Party of Maldives’ deputy leader said.

“In a democratic environment with separation of powers, how can we influence the other power,” he said.

Nasheed must be tried and penalized to ensure justice is done to Judge Abdulla Mohamed, he continued.

Related to this story

Former President Nasheed arrives in court with arm in makeshift sling

Nasheed denied right to appoint lawyer and appeal “arbitrary” arrest warrant, contend lawyers

Police arrest former President Mohamed Nasheed ahead of terrorism trial

MDP, JP rally supporters ahead of mass February 27 march

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

More than seven Maldivians fighting in foreign civil wars, reveals home minister

More than seven Maldivians are currently fighting in foreign civil wars, Minister of Home Affairs Umar Naseer revealed at the People’s Majlis today.

Responding to a query during minister’s question time from former police commissioner and Jumhooree Party MP Abdulla Riyaz about the ministry’s efforts to prevent Maldivians joining civil wars in foreign nations, Naseer said police were monitoring persons with extremist religious views.

“In such cases, persons attempting to leave abroad with the intention of joining civil wars have been stopped with court orders and prohibited from leaving,” he said.

“And the passports of some people have been withheld for a period determined by the court.”

Maldivian jihadis have also been brought back to the country with help from foreign law enforcement agencies, he added.

However, police faced difficulties in proving guilt at court of persons intending to join foreign civil wars, he continued, suggesting that the evidentiary standard should be lowered for terrorism cases.

Police were also working with the Islamic ministry to provide religious counselling and advice to discourage Maldivians from flying overseas to fight in civil wars, Naseer said.

Efforts were meanwhile underway to establish an efficient mechanism for taking action based on intelligence information, Naseer said.

While neighbouring countries provide assistance in returning Maldivians intending to travel for jihad, Naseer said the government was unable to bring back Maldivians who have made their way into Syria.

The government is studying a recently-approved UN security council resolution on foreign terrorist fighters, Naseer said, and would comply with obligations.

A strategic action plan is also being implemented to combat religious extremism, he added, which involved prevention of radical views in public schools.

Asked about efforts to prevent recruitment in the country, Naseer said the government has banned independent prayer congregations across the country.

Naseer denied claims by opposition Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) MP ‘Reeko’ Moosa Manik that Maldivian students who went to Sudan through the Islamic ministry in 2012 are involved in violent conflicts.

He also denied MDP MP Abdul Bari Abdulla’s allegation that government ministers were involved in a “network” for recruiting Maldivian jihadis with help from foreign terrorist organisations.

Police intelligence officers were constantly monitoring alleged recruitment efforts, Naseer said, insisting that foreign terrorist organisations or religious extremists would not be able to interfere in domestic affairs.

“The number of Maldivians participating in foreign wars would be proportionately much lower than large European nations,” he said.

Islamic State

Last month, a jihadist media group called Bilad al-Sham – which describes itself as ‘Maldivians in Syria’ – revealed that a fifth Maldivian had died in Syria.

Earlier in the month, Sri Lankan police detained three Maldivians who were allegedly preparing to travel to Syria through Turkey.

The three – two men aged 23 and 25, and a woman aged 18 – were from the island of Madduvari in Raa atoll and were released from custody upon being brought back to the Maldives.

The incident followed reports of a couple from Fuvahmulah and a family of four from Meedhoo in Raa atoll traveling to militant organisation Islamic State-held (IS) territories to join the fighting in Syria and Iraq.

A UN report obtained by the UK’s Guardian newspaper earlier this month observed that foreign jihadists were now travelling to Syria and Iraq on “an unprecedented scale”.

The report mentioned the Maldives as one of the “unlikely” places from which IS supporters have emerged.

Meanwhile, a protest march took place in the capital, Malé, in September, with around 200 participants bearing the IS flag and calling for the implementation of Islamic Shariah in the Maldives.

In late August, Foreign Minister Dunya Maumoon issued a press statement condemning “the crimes committed against innocent civilians by the organisation which identifies itself as the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant or the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria.”

Dunya’s remarks followed Minister of Islamic Affairs Dr Mohamed Shaheem Ali Saeed’s declaration that the ISIS would not be allowed to operate in the Maldives.

“ISIS is an extremist group. No space will be given for their ideology and activities in the Maldives,” Shaheem tweeted on August 24.

Shaheem had also appealed for Maldivians to refrain from participating in foreign wars and has recently defended the government’s record on extremism before the Majlis.

The Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP), however, promptly put out a statement questioning Shaheem’s sincerity, suggesting that the words had not been backed up with concrete action by the government.

Former President Mohamed Nasheed has claimed that up to 200 Maldivians are on jihad, alleging that a vast majority of them are ex-military – a claim vehemently denied by the security services.

“Radical Islam is getting very very strong in the Maldives, their strength in the military and in the police is very significant. They have people in strategic positions within both,” Nasheed said in an interview with UK’s Independent newspaper.


Related to this story

Islamic minister defends government policy on extremism

Police detain Maldivian jihadis caught in Sri Lanka

Police arrest Imam of unauthorised independent prayer congregation

Islamic Minister advises Maldivians against participating in foreign wars

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

High Court concludes hearings into Criminal Court’s rejection of Thinadhoo terrorism cases

The High Court today concluded hearings into an appeal by Prosecutor General’s (PG) Office requesting the repealing of a Criminal Court decision to throw out charges of terrorism against 89 individuals from Gaaf Dhaal Thinadhoo Island.

Criminal Court Chief Judge Abdulla Mohamed had dismissed the charges, claiming the PG’s Office was refusing to cooperate with the trial after state prosecutors’ failure to turn up to a trial scheduled for 10am on Saturday, November 22.

PG Muhthaz Mushin has requested the High Court to rule the Criminal Court’s dismissal of the case through a letter as unlawful and to order the terrorism trials to continue.

The 89 defendants faced terrorism charges for allegedly setting fire to the island’s police station, court building, and several police vehicles during nationwide unrest on February 8, 2012 in the wake of former President Mohamed Nasheed’s controversial resignation the previous day.

State prosecutor Shaudha Shameem challenged the Criminal Court’s decision claiming state prosecutors had telephoned and informed the court in advance that they would not be able to attend the hearing on Saturday, November 22.

She contended the Criminal Court had attempted to handover summons to court outside work hours on November 22, Thursday.

But state prosecutors refused to accept summons, as Saturday is not a working day, and because the court had initially scheduled hearings for November 23 instead of November 22, she continued.

Shaudha argued that the Criminal Court could only throw out charges in a courtroom in the presence of the plaintiff and defendant, and claimed Judge Abdulla had failed to follow due procedures in dismissing the case.

She noted that the Criminal Court had previously consulted state prosecutors in scheduling hearings given their busy work schedule.

Two of the 89 facing terrorism charges intervened in the case. with their lawyers – Ibrahim Riffath and Hisaan Hussein – saying the Criminal Court had followed due process by informing the PG’s Office of the November 22 hearing via a letter on the afternoon of November 20.

Hisaan said a presiding judge is authorised to dismiss charges if the plaintiff fails to abide by the judge’s orders, and said a judge has the discretion to decide on the validity of reasons provided for failure to attend hearings.

State prosecutors must not receive special exemptions, she contended.

Meanwhile, Riffath suggested the PG’s Office was lax in cooperating with the trial, pointing out the state had only been able to provide witness testimony during two of the eight hearings.

The High Court bench has said it will issue a verdict in the next hearing. A date for the verdict has not yet been set.

Muhthaz has since resubmitted the cases to the Criminal Court twice. The court rejected the cases on Monday claiming it had no guarantee of cooperation from the PG office.

The PG office submitted cases again yesterday with a letter pledging full cooperation.

Defence lawyers have previously criticised Judge Abdulla’s earlier decisions during the hearings.

Last week, the chief judge ordered 55 of the 89 defendants be held in detention pending the outcome of the trials, claiming the accused were intimidating witnesses. All have subsequently been released.

Defence lawyers have described the judge’s decision to hold the accused in custody as “most unusual” as the identities of state witnesses were not disclosed and had their voices disguised in order to protect their identity.

Around 80 people from Addu City are also currently facing terrorism charges in relation to unrest in the southernmost atoll on February 8.


Related to this story


PG to appeal Criminal Court’s dismissal of terrorism cases

Criminal Court rejects Thinadhoo terrorism cases

55 Thinadhoo arson suspects detained until end of trial

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

PG to appeal Criminal Court’s dismissal of terrorism cases

The Prosecutor General (PG) Office will appeal the Criminal Court’s dismissal of terrorism charges against 89 defendants from the island of Thinadhoo in Gaaf Dhaalu atoll, PG Muthaz Muhsin has told local media.

On Saturday (November 22), Criminal Court Chief Judge Abdulla Mohamed dismissed the cases after state prosecutors failed to attend a hearing scheduled for 10:00am.

Muhsin said the PG’s Office was informed of the hearing after 2:30pm on Thursday via a fax and were unable to make arrangements, though lawyers working on the case have told Minivan News that the hearings had been scheduled in advance for 10am every day – including Saturdays – for the duration of the trial.

In addition to appealing the dismissal, Muhsin said the cases would be resubmitted to the Criminal Court today.

Last week, the chief judge ordered 55 defendants be held in detention pending the outcome of the trials, claiming the accused were intimidating witnesses. All have subsequently been released.

The court had earlier ordered the detention of 17 of the 89 defendants, all of whom were released following the dismissal of the cases on Saturday.

Defence lawyers described the judge’s decision to hold the accused in custody as “most usual” as the identities of state witnesses were not disclosed and had their voices disguised in order to protect their identity.

The 89 defendants faced terrorism charges for allegedly setting fire to the island’s police station, court building, and several police vehicles during nationwide unrest on February 8, 2012 in the wake of former President Mohamed Nasheed’s controversial resignation the previous day.

Acts of arson are considered terrorism under the Terrorism Prevention Act enacted by the administration of former President Maumoon Abdul Gayoom. The offence carries a jail term of between 10 to 15 years.

Around 80 people from Addu City are also currently facing terrorism charges in relation to unrest in the southernmost atoll on February 8.

The opposition Maldivian Democratic Party has accused the government of selectively prosecuting dozens of the party’s members and supporters in Addu City and Thinadhoo.

The party has also criticised the use of a single judge – Abdulla Mohamed – in all the cases related to the February 8 unrest, calling the entire process “highly politically motivated”, noting that police officers who committed crimes on February 6, 7, and 8 were not being prosecuted.

On February 8, 2012, riots spread across the country following a brutal crackdown on an MDP march in the capital.

Thousands of MDP supporters took to the streets of Malé in a protest march after Nasheed declared his resignation the previous day had come “under duress” in a “coup d’etat” instigated by mutinying police officers of the Special Operations (SO).

Following an investigation, the Human Rights Commission of Maldives concluded that the heavy-handed police crackdown on the MDP walk was “brutal” and “without warning” while the “disproportionate” use of force left dozens of demonstrators injured and hospitalised.


Related to this story

55 Thinadhoo arson suspects detained until end of trial

Police crackdown sparks riots across the Maldives – “acts of terrorism” say police

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Criminal Court hears concluding statements for ‘Husseynube’ murder case

The Criminal Court yesterday concluded hearings in the ‘Husseynube’ murder trial, obtaining the concluding statements from both the Prosecutor General’s Office and the defendants.

Hussain Mohamed Manik – known by the islanders of Hoarafushi as ‘Husseynube’ – was a prominent businessman found dead inside an abandoned house in September 2010.

Ahmed Ibrahim, Mohamed Latheef, and Numan Abdulla were arrested in connection with the murder and charged with terrorism in September 2011.

The Prosecutor General’s Office accused the three of murdering 61 year-old Hussain Mohamed after taking him hostage and robbing him.

It was accused that the defendants stole more than MVR100,000 and US$1000 in cash from the victim.

According to local media present at the court yesterday, the prosecution said that the three  charged with the murder had confessed to police during the investigation, explaining how the incident had occurred.

The prosecutors noted that the information given by the suspects after the confession could only be known by a person involved in the murder. He also noted that their information had led to evidence that had been produced in court.

However, the defence lawyer told the court that police conduct during the investigation of the case was unlawful.

He said that any confession made outside of the court should be dismissed, to which the judge responded by saying that he would adhere to the clause in the constitution which states that confession made outside the court will be inadmissible.

Before concluding the hearing the judge announced that the case was to be concluded by the end of this month.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)