Tag: Universal Period Review

Maldives defers decision on UPR recommendations for judicial reform

The Maldives has deferred accepting or rejecting recommendations put forth at the UN human rights council on judicial reform and protection of human rights defenders, pending “national level consultation”.

Of the 258 recommendations from UN member states, the government accepted 132 and rejected 49 due to constitutional constraints. The Maldives said it will examine the remaining 77 recommendations and “provide responses in due time” before the 30th session of the Human Rights Council in September or October 2015.

The recommendations under review include calls to ensure the impartiality and independence of the judiciary, reform the Judicial Service Commission, and provide training to judges.

The “politicised” judiciary came under fire from countries across the world during last week’s UPR session, which took place amidst heightened international scrutiny and political turbulence triggered by the imprisonment of former president Mohamed Nasheed.

The UK recommended steps to “ensure the administration of justice is fully consistent with international human rights standards and seek international technical assistance.”

“Strengthen the independence of the judiciary by reforming the Judicial Services Commission’s process for selecting and appointing judges,” recommended the US.

Canada advised the formation of an independent bar association while several countries recommended steps to ensure the separation of powers.

Ireland recommended providing “adequate training for judges, including human rights training, to ensure all judicial proceedings conform to international fair trial standards”.

New Zealand recommended accepting “a follow up visit by the Special Rapporteur on the independence of judges and lawyers and accept the outstanding request of a visit by the Special Rapporteur on the situations of human rights defenders.”

The Netherlands advised fully implementing the special rapporteurs’ recommendations, including a constitutional review of the composition of the JSC.

Responding to criticism of the judiciary at the working group session, foreign minister Dunya Maumoon said the Maldives is training and building capacity of judges and has formulated a judicial sector strategic action plan to increase effectiveness, efficiency and public confidence.

The 49 recommendations Maldives rejected include allowing freedom of religion, ensuring the rights of homosexuals, banning the death penalty, and decriminalising consensual sexual relations.

The rejected recommendations also included removing a requirement that prevents non-Muslims from being members of the Human Rights Commission of Maldives (HRCM).

The Maldives constitutional assembly had declared Islam to be the state religion and the basis of all laws enacted in the country, and requires judges to refer to Islamic law, legal secretary Aishath Bisham said last week.

Other rejected recommendations included calls from Norway and Canada to release ex-president Nasheed and other “political prisoners.”

The US also called for an end to “politically-motivated prosecutions and court proceedings” against HRCM members and Nasheed, who was “convicted and imprisoned without minimum fair trial guarantees”.

Human rights defenders

Several countries also recommended taking steps to ensure the safety of human rights defenders, civil society actors and journalists against attacks and reprisals, calling for investigation and prosecution of individuals behind threats and intimidation.

The independence of the HRCM should also be assured, its members protected from reprisals, and the HRCM law brought in line with Paris Principles, reads the recommendations under review.

During the review, many countries expressed alarm over the Supreme Court’s suo moto case against the human rights watchdog over its UPR submission.

Denmark meanwhile noted that the Maldives’ initial report to the UN Committee against Torture is overdue since 2005.

“Bring an end to arbitrary detentions, particularly on the grounds of political opinion; investigate allegations of torture and ill treatment in prisons and bring those responsible to justice,” recommended France.

Other recommendations included ratification of the International Convention on the Protection of the Rights of All Migrant Workers and Members of Their Families, the International Convention for the Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearance, and the optional protocol of the Convention on the Rights of the Child.

Germany and Portugal recommended the Maldives accede to Convention relating to the Status of Refugees, the Convention relating to the Status of Stateless Persons, and the Convention on the Reduction of Statelessness.

Other countries recommended signing the UNESCO Convention against Discrimination in Education and the Protocol to the Convention Against Transnational Organised Crime.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Foreign minister ‘misled’ UN on Nasheed trial

The office of former president Mohamed Nasheed has accused foreign minister Dunya Maumoon of “deliberately misleading” the UN Human Rights Council regarding the opposition leader’s terrorism trial.

During the Maldives’ Universal Period Review in Geneva on May 6, Dunya claimed that Nasheed chose not to appeal his 13-year sentence and that due process concerns regarding the trial were procedural and not substantive.

Criticism of Nasheed’s trial had “mainly focused on the process and not the merits,” she said.

But Nasheed’s office contends he was deliberately denied the right to appeal after the criminal court failed to provide necessary documentation within the ten day appeal period specified by the Supreme Court.

“The Maldives’ criminal court refused to release the transcript of the trial — information vital to the launch of an appeal — until 11 days after conviction, thus deliberately preventing Nasheed’s legal team from appealing,” reads a statement released yesterday.

It added that Nasheed’s lawyers informed the court of their intent to appeal four days after the conviction on March 13.

“The lawyers repeatedly asked the criminal court for the trial transcript, but the court refused to release it until the window for appeal had closed. When the transcript was finally released, it had been doctored and was full of irregularities,” the statement continued.

President Abdulla Yameen and other senior government officials have repeatedly advised Nasheed to appeal. Prosecutor general Muhthaz Muhsin told Minivan News last week that the High Court could accept an appeal despite the expiration of the 10-day period.

“I personally think this case has a high possibility of being accepted at the high court since Nasheed is a former president, since it is related to a judge and since it is a terrorism charge,” he said.

But Nasheed’s lawyers say the Supreme Court, in the same ruling that had shortened the 90 day appeal period to ten days, had removed the High Court’s discretionary powers.

The apex court in January had voided Article 42  of the Judicature Act which set out appeal deadlines and gave judges discretionary powers in accepting late appeals. The 90–180 day appeal period obstructed justice, the Supreme Court said. A new 10-day appeal period was set out, but the apex court was silent on procedures for late appeals.

Nasheed’s lawyer, Hisaan Hussain, told the press today there was no “legal basis” for the government’s stance.

She suggested the government was encouraging Nasheed to appeal because it could determine the outcome through its undue influence over the judiciary.

“The government is saying in the same breath that it does not meddle in court cases but that there is still the opportunity to appeal despite the 10-day period elapsing,” she said.

Nasheed wanted to appeal, but was effectively deprived of the right to appeal due to the criminal court’s “deliberate” refusal to release the transcripts until the 11th day after sentencing, she said.

The legal team reiterated calls for president Yameen to exercise powers under clemency laws to pardon and release Nasheed.

Lawyer Hassan Latheef claimed 10 countries had called for Nasheed’s release during the UPR session, warning that the Maldives could face international sanctions if the government does not comply.

Nasheed was found guilty on terrorism charges relating to the detention of criminal court chief judge Abdulla Mohamed in January 2012.

Amnesty called the conviction a “travesty of justice” while the UN human rights chief said Nasheed was sentenced after a “hasty and apparently unfair trial” and noted “flagrant irregularities.”

The special rapporteur noted “serious due process violations” such as denial of the opportunity to present defence witnesses, which led her to believe “the outcome of the trial may have been pre-determined.”

The European parliament meanwhile adopted a resolution condemning the “serious irregularities” of the trial while US secretary of state John Kerry said during a visit to Sri Lanka that Nasheed was “imprisoned without due process”.

“This is an injustice that needs to be addressed soon,” he said.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)