Tag: waheed

President’s Office budget exceeded by MVR 7 million in 2010: audit report

President’s Office spent in spent MVR 7,415,960 (US$480,931) over the parliament approved budget for the office in 2010, according to the auditor general’s office.

The audit report, released on Thursday, focused on the expenses of the President’s Office and the residences of the President and the Vice President.

The report spells out explicitly 12 instances in which the Auditor General believes the President’s Office acted in breach of laws and regulations.

In addition to the excess expenditure of MVR 7 million, the report also highlights then-President Mohamed Nasheed’s chartering of an Island Aviation flight from Colombo to Male’ on November 19, 2010. This had cost MVR 146,490 (US$9500) for the charter itself, together with the ground handling fee of MVR 3,097 (US$ 201) paid to Sri Lankan Airlines, and fuel charges of MVR 11,925 (US$773) paid to Ceylon Petroleum Corporation.

The audit report states that while all these were paid from state funds, no records were available to prove that Nasheed booked this flight for official purposes. It stated that the trip was there considered to have been made for personal reasons and that Nasheed has not yet paid back this amount to the state.

The report also points out that the state had used the special budget of the Ministry of Finance and Treasury to settle payments worth MVR 21.9 million (US$1.4 million) to two foreign companies who were assisting an investigation which was being conducted by the Presidential Commission, understood to be an investigation of the former government’s sale of oil to the Burmese military junta.

Another transaction considered unlawful by the Auditor General’s report was the settling of pending bills dated between 2005 and 2008 submitted by a Malaysian company for the purchase of items for the presidential palace during former President Maumoon Abdul Gayoom’s administration.

Other incidents stated in the report include failure to submit reports on official trips made abroad or documents to highlight achievements made in these trips, hiring consultants outside of recruitment procedure and without specifying their duties, payment of fines levied due to failure to process bill payments by deadlines and incurring additional spending due to lack of timely organising of trips to local atolls.

The report details the amounts spend in the year 2010 on the annual paid vacation of 30 days with their respective families by the President and the Vice President.

Former President Nasheed is said to have spent MVR 446,578 (US$28,961) on a trip to Singapore with family, while  President Mohamed Waheed Hassan, then Vice President, had spent MVR 764,121 (US$49,554) on a trip to Malaysia and America with his own family.

The report calls on the state to put in place policies to govern limits of the amounts that can be spent by the President and Vice President on their annual vacation.

It also points out the lack of documentation to prove that trips made by families of the President or Vice President citing medical purposes were indeed made for those reasons.

The report emphasises that the amounts spent on the President’s official residence had significantly decreased, offering a comparison of the amounts spent since 2007. According to the report, the President’s official residence spent MVR 68.8 million in 2007, MVR 79.7 million in 2008, MVR 42.04 million in 2009 and MVR 27.13 million in 2010.

It cites staff cuts from 313 to 154 personnel, and lower spending on official trips among other reasons for the decreased spending.

Chief of Staff during Nasheed’s administration and current Deputy Chair, Finance, of MDP Ahmed Mausoom was not responding to calls at the time of press. Minivan News was also unable to reach President’s Office Spokesperson Masood Imad.

Read the full report (Dhivehi) here.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

PPM council elected at party’s first ever congress

Key positions within the Progressive Party of Maldives (PPM) were filled this weekend during elections at the party’s first ever congress.

Twelve out of the fourteen seats of PPM’s council were won by party members aligned with MP Abdulla Yameen, who is competing for the party’s presidential primary against interim Vice President of PPM, Umar Nasser.

Yameen’s half brother, former President of the Maldives Maumoon Abdul Gayoom, was appointed PPM President after being the only candidate nominated for the post.

Yameen was also appointed Parliamentary Group Leader. Both Yameen and Gayoom were appointed to their respective positions without a vote, as no one else contested against them.

Gayoom’s daughter, Dhunya Maumoon was selected as PPM’s Women Branch President and Abdul Raheem Abdullah was appointed Deputy Leader of PPM Parliamentary Group Leader, also without contest.

Gayoom’s son, Faris Maumoon secured the highest number of votes by a single candidate at 419, while his other son, Ghassan Maumoon received 416 votes.

PPM Vice Presidency

Tourism Minister Ahmed Adheeb and PPM Parliamentary Group Deputy Leader Ilham Ahmed were elected as the first vice presidents of PPM.

Local media reported the temporary results of the secret votes taken at PPM congress show that Adheeb received 361 out of 400 votes.

Ilham received 301 votes while Raheem – who was later appointed as Deputy Leader of PPM Parliamentary Group Leader – received 268 votes.

The temporary results have not yet been officially announced at the congress, which is taking place at Darubaaruge, Malé.

PPM Council Member and lead activist of Umar Naseer’s presidential primary campaign team, Ibrahim Nazim was elected as President of PPM’s youth group.

Aminath Nadhaa was elected as vice president of the party’s youth group with 40 votes in favour.

PPM formed due to actions of Nasheed: Gayoom

Former autocratic ruler Gayoom, who presided over the Maldives for thirty years, said that PPM was formed due to the actions of former President Mohamed Nasheed’s government, local media reported.

Speaking during the PPM congress, the Gayoom claimed that government accountability was largely reduced during Nasheed’s presidency and assaults had become “commonplace”, Sun Online reported.

Gayoom added that PPM took part in the demonstrations held between 2011 and 2012 and that they are now part of the multi-party coalition that was formed following Nasheed’s controversial removal from power in February 2012, local media stated.

Under the ‘multi-party coalition’ that has since taken control of the country, a new bill enforcing limitations on such demonstrations and protests was recently ratified by President Mohamed Waheed Hassan Manik.

In a joint statement from local NGOs Transparency Maldives (TM) and Maldivian Democracy Network (MDN) this month (January 2), it warned that the bill posed “serious challenges to the whole democratic system”.

The statement claimed that the bill could restrict the constitutional right to freedom of assembly (article 32), freedom of expression (article 27) and press freedom (article 28).

Speaking at the congress on Friday, Gayoom urged candidates who lost out, not to feel disheartened as the ‘opportunity to serve the nation was still available’, local media reported.

“Don’t think of it as an obstacle. The future is in your hands. The chance to serve the party and nation will become available,” the former President was quoted as saying in local newspaper Haveeru.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Comment: Maldives competitive, combative, yet cooperative, too

With Maldivian President Mohamed Waheed Hassan Manik returning two [the “political parties” and the “privileges” bills] of the three crucial bills passed by parliament, the stage is now set for a possible, limited confrontation between the executive and the legislature, all over again.

For the third “public assemblies” bill, the president has given his assent, but the opposition Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) says it would defy the law if it came to that.

The president has rejected the bill that mandates 10,000-strong membership – up from the existing 3,000 – for political parties to be registered by and with the Election Commission (EC).

As the Maldivian budget allocates 0.1 percent of the GDP for the state funding of political parties, which in turn is based on registered membership, the law has serious consequences for smaller parties. Included in the list are the Gaumee Ithihaad Party (GIP) of President Waheed and the Dhivehi Qaumee Party (DQP) of his Special Advisor Dr Hassan Saeed. The DQP was the second runner-up in the first round of presidential polls in 2008.

The Maldives is a nation where democratic education and elections are a costly affair. Given the vast seas that have to be traversed for a campaign – even in individual parliamentary constituencies. as well as the small number of electorate covered in comparison to other countries – few political parties can sustain themselves without state funding.

With other political parties neck-deep in campaigning for the presidential polls due later this year, any last-minute changes in the law could have consequences for them all.

The “political parties” bill regarding privileges of parliament and MPs, which has also been returned to parliament by the president, has limited application. However, the bill assumes greater significance in the context of some government ministers and other political party leaders in the government ridiculing parliamentarians, and threatening [to remove] them from public platforms.

In the case of the religion-centric Adhaalath Party (AP) for instance, together the two bills could stall its recent efforts to project itself as the self-appointed defender of Islam among Maldivian political parties, protecting Maldivian people’s rights via their elected representatives. Needless to point out, the AP does not have any elected member in the People’s Majlis (parliament).

President Waheed aims at regulating public assemblies and rallies through the third bill. It is a reaction to the MDP rallies following the February 7 transfer-of-power, some of which turned violent. Protests and counter-protests had a tendency to multiply, and the security forces had little power or even the scope to regulate them; especially considering the distance between rival groups’ rallies.

Armed with the 2008 constitutional guarantee protecting the citizens’ rights in the matter, an air of permissiveness was threatening tranquility in the tourism-driven country.

Consensus and cohabitation

Parliament is in recess at present, and is not expected to meet again until March. It is almost a foregone conclusion that the house will vote the two bills be returned to the President, enabling a mandatory assent for both, within 14 days of such passage.

The opposition MDP as the single largest party cannot protest in the interim considering party leader and former President Mohamed Nasheed similarly returned a bill amending the Finance Act, only to grant his assent at the last-minute after the Majlis passed it a second time.

However, what is interesting is the combination of votes that each of these bills polled. Though moved by MDP members in the Parliament, the ‘political parties’ bill and the ‘privileges’ bill had the support of the Progressive Party of Maldives (PPM) and the Dhivehi Rayyithunge Party (DRP), the top two parties in President Waheed’s government.

The MDP opposed the bill regulating public assemblies, but other political parties in the government mustered their strength to have it passed.

The combination can pose an embarrassment, though not a challenge, to the government in general and President Waheed in particular, when parliament votes on the two returned bills. The MDP can then actively consider moving the no-confidence motion against President Waheed, which it has been talking about for a long time.

The government parties can be expected to rally around their President – whose term expires later this year – to deny the mandatory two-thirds vote for the impeachment of the head of state.

For the MDP, it could still serve a limited purpose – that is if they are capable of putting together a winning alliance.

Indications are that every party in the government now wants to put up a candidate for the presidential polls, and could rally round the top one in the second, run-off round. Some parties in the coalition may also develop other ideas during the second-round polls, where MDP’s Nasheed may be considered.

What needs noting at such a stage is the emergence of ‘consensus politics’ in present-day Maldives, both inside and outside Parliament, at a time when the nation is otherwise burdened by political divisions and personality clashes.

Independent of the issues involved, it could also set the tone for ‘cohabitation politics’, where the executive and the legislature would be seen as learning to live with each other. The Maldives would then have matured into a democracy capable of voting on issues, inside parliament and outside, moving away from personalities even while retaining the party-tag, to a limited extent at the very least.

Jarring notes, still?

What may send out a jarring note against this background is the MDP’s declaration that the bill regulating public assemblies could not stop the party from launching its promised ‘revolution’. Considering that the ‘revolution’ call was given by at meeting of the MDP’s National Council that had discussed the pending criminal case against President Nasheed, the two may be inter-linked. Thereby hangs a tale, as any conviction of President Nasheed on the charge of ordering the ‘illegal detention’ of Criminal Court Chief Judge Abdulla Mohamed while he was in power could disqualify him from contesting the elections.

Apart from the ‘Nasheed case’, the Supreme Court is already seized with litigation pertaining to the powers of the legislature vis-a-vie the judiciary; particularly in the summoning of sitting judges trying President Nasheed before a house committee.

Interestingly, the majority decision of the parliament, endorsed also by Speaker Abdulla Shahid, favours the sovereignty of the people under the constitutional scheme, represented by the supremacy of Parliament over the powers and independence of the judiciary. A judicial interpretation in context would have consequences that the infant democracy has to learn in the interim.

Of equal importance in the Nasheed case, in terms of the immediacy of the circumstances involved, would be any case proceeding from the second passage of the “political parties” bill, with mandatory assent from the President. The Adhaalath Party has already declared its intention to fight it out legally, but such a course would now have to wait until after the bill becomes law.

The question is if the judiciary has adequate time to adjudicate on the issue between the time the bill becomes law and the notification for fresh elections to the presidency. If not, would the status quo be maintained in the matter? If in the process, would any judicial stay of the new law pending final disposal be challenged by the legislature, but not the executive as it exists now?

Revisiting CoNI report

Even as these complicated questions beg acceptable and adaptable answers, the MDP has gone ahead with revisiting the report of the Commission of National Inquiry (CoNI), which upheld the power-transfer of February 7 last year. The MDP-controlled Parliament Committee on Government Oversight has opened investigations on the CoNI Report, which has been endorsed by the incumbent Government and the international community alike.

Under powers purportedly entrusted to it, the committee has decided to summon President Waheed and President Nasheed to appear before it. The committee has also decided to get two external experts (obviously of its choice) to comment on the CoNI report. As if tit-for-tat, a temporary committee of parliament, where the government has a majority, has decided to investigate the commissions and omissions of the Nasheed presidency with renewed vigour.

More recently, the MDP members of the committee, meeting in the absence of other party members, have directed the nation’s Prosecutor General (PG) to proceed legally against incumbent Defence Minister Mohammed Nazim and Police Commissioner Abdullah Riaz on charges of violating Article 99 of the Constitution, by their refusal to honour the panel’s summons, for their interrogation on the CoNI Report. However, the committee has spared Ahmed Shiyam, chief of the Maldivian National Defence Forces (MNDF).

The committee’s views are opposed to those of Attorney General Azima Shakoor, who had earlier written to Speaker Abdullah Shahid that the proceedings were at variance with the Majlis’ Rules of Procedure, and has failed to protect the rights and privileges of individuals summoned before it. If taken forward, this has the potential for a clash between constitutional institutions, though ultimately if approached the Supreme Court could clarify the position.

Apart from the legislative business and judicial pronouncements, such initiatives too have consequences that would cancel out each other at one level, but complicate matters otherwise.

What the political parties need to understand and accept is the fact that neither in constitutional terms, nor in political terms, are such measures expected to give them an additional advantage, either in domestic elections or with the international community.

For that to happen, they have to be seen as winning the presidential polls first and the parliamentary polls next year. The rest of it would be dismissed as fencing by their domestic constituencies and wagering by the international community.

In the process, they would have dissipated their own energies and also frustrated their constituencies, at home and afar. For they are all still working on more problems that the nation can ill-afford and is even more ill-equipped to handle, not on solutions to the existing problems, which are also of their own making.

The writer is a Senior Fellow at Observer Research Foundation

All comment pieces are the sole view of the author and do not reflect the editorial policy of Minivan News. If you would like to write an opinion piece, please send proposals to [email protected]

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

PPM would pursue oil exploration, foreign investment: Abdulla Yameen

The potential for developing a domestic oil industry was launched as a campaign issue during a speech on Monday (January 14) by Progressive Party of the Maldives (PPM) presidential prospect, MP Abdulla Yameen.

Yameen proclaimed “when the PPM comes to power” it will conduct oil exploration, attract foreign investment and create 26,000 tourism jobs.

However, the Maldives’ environmental image and commitments are no obstacles to oil industry development, according to Tourism Minister Ahmed Adheeb – currently standing for nomination as the PPM’s vice president.

Adheeb told Minivan News the Maldives was “a big nation, and places not in marine protected zones or tourism areas could be explored for oil, like in the less developed north.”

“Oil exploration is a term and [we] cannot conclude something with out the details. Regulations and more planning need to be done,” he said.

The ‘Draft Maldives Fourth Tourism Master Plan’ released January 9 by the Ministry of Tourism, Arts and Culture emphasises the need for climate change mitigation, adaptation, and renewable energy as part of its five-year strategic plan.

“The tourism sector is expected to contribute to the carbon neutral goal by introducing measures over the next eight years for energy efficiency and replacing fossil fuel with renewable energy,” the report states.

The plan contains various strategic actions aimed at “developing and enforcing” management plans for [marine protected areas] and sensitive environments. This includes “implementing a low carbon program for the tourism industry”.

“A long-term focus on adopting reliable and affordable energy from renewable resources (like sun, wind, sea and biomass) provides an opportunity to enhance our tourism development model, already well known for its sustainable practices. A low carbon path for development has been identified as key development strategy in Maldives as a whole,” the report notes.

“[Economic] diversification is in line with the tourism master plan,” Adheeb told Minivan News.

“[The] first priority should be tourism [however] the economy needs to be diversified and protected,” he said.

Yameen pledges oil exploration

During the launch of the PPM ‘Team Yageen’ campaign, Yameen declared his platform would focus on foreign investment and the creation of job opportunities, local media reported.

“Given the current economic situation, local businessmen alone cannot create enough job opportunities. We must welcome foreign investors for the benefit of our nation,” Yameen said, according to Haveeru.

Yameen’s proposals include searching for oil, prioritising the tourism industry, and creating a cargo transit port.

Previous oil exploration attempts in 1980 found the cost of retrieving the oil was too high compared to the US$20 (MVR 308) price per barrel at the time. However the present price of US$125 (MVR 1925) per barrel made further exploration feasible.

“It is very possible oil might be found in the Maldives,” Yameen said.

“[The PPM] have a very close relationship with tourist resort owners. The [economic] benefits of the tourism industry are creating job opportunities through the [tourism goods and services] tax,” he added.

Team Umar’s stance

‘Team Yageen’s opposition for the PPM leadership, ‘Team Umar’, played down the proposal.

PPM Interim Vice President Umar Naseer said it was not acceptable for people in responsible portfolios of the government to talk about things that they could not do while they were in power.

Yameen’s proposal to search for oil in the Maldives was not new, Naseer claimed, noting that Yameen had plenty of time during the Gayoom administration to pursue such an agenda.

”Fifteen years is enough time for someone searching for oil to find it. ‘Team Umar’ will not make empty talk; if we are to search for oil, then we will find it and sell it,” said Naseer.

”These words are not new to us. If they had been new words they would have impressed ‘Team Umar’ as well,” he added.

Government biosphere and renewable energy commitments

The development of an oil industry in the Maldives would be an apparent reversal of President Mohamed Waheed’s declaration during the Rio 20+ UN Conference on Sustainable Development in June 2012 that the Maldives would “become the first country to be a marine reserve”.

During the conference, Waheed highlighted the 2012 establishment of the first UNESCO Biosphere reserve in Baa Atoll, as well as the Maldives’ commitment to carbon neutrality and sustainable development.

“Our tourism sector is a sustainable one, relying on the preservation of our magnificent coral reefs, beautiful beaches and our rich and diverse marine life,” Waheed stated.

The Maldives is meanwhile participating in the 3rd General Assembly of International Renewable Energy Agency (IRENA) in Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates, which started this week (13 January 2013).

Minister of Environment and Energy Dr Mariyam Shakeela has also highlighted the ongoing renewable energy activities undertaken by the Maldivian government and the necessity of renewable energy for mitigating climate change.

Shakeela recently signed a Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) with the Diesel Replacement Project of the Clinton Climate Initiative’s Clean Energy Initiative, a program of the William J Clinton Foundation.

The focus of this program is to enact “projects and policies that directly reduce greenhouse gas emissions” including renewable energy projects to reduce dependency on diesel fuel.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

President returns from private visit to Malaysia

President Dr Mohamed Waheed Hassan Manik has returned to Male’ following a private visit to Malaysia.

President Waheed, along with First Lady Ilham Hussain, returned to Male’ on Saturday (January 5), the President’s Office website has reported.

On Thursday (January 3), President Waheed met with the Malaysian Foreign Minister Dato’ Sri Anifah Aman at the Maldives High Commission in the country as part of his trip.

According to the President’s Office website, discussions at the meeting were focused on improving bilateral relations between the two countries.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Maldives cabinet marks 80th anniversary

The Maldivian cabinet marked its 80th anniversary yesterday (December 22).

Formed in 1932, the first cabinet portfolios included a total of twelve ministries, including the prime minister’s office, the defence ministry and justice ministry, the President’s Office has said.

In the last 80 years, the Maldives’ cabinet has been led by by Prime Minister Mohamed Fareed, Foreign Minister Hassan Fareed, Prime Minister Mohamed Ameen, Prime Minister Ibrahim Faamdheyri Kilegefaanu, Ibrahim Nasir as Prime Minster and then President, Prime Minister Ahmed Zaki, President Maumoon Abdul Gayoom, President Mohamed Nasheed and President Dr Mohamed Waheed Hassan.

According to the President’s Office, notable cabinet figures in the Maldives political history include include Mohamed Amin Didi, who was the youngest ever cabinet minister at 22.

Meanwhile, former President Gayoom was noted as the longest serving cabinet minister,while Moomina Haleem was the first female cabinet minister appointed as Minister of Health on January 6, 1977.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

President Waheed commences tour of Gaafu Alifu Atoll

President Dr Mohamed Waheed Hassan has commenced a series of visits to islands in Gaafu Alifu Atoll as part of a tour designed to try outline the key concerns and issues faced by local residents, according to the President’s Office website.

Addressing islanders in Dhevvadhoo, Nilandhoo, Gemanafushi and Kan’duhulhudhoo, President Waheed noted that many islanders in the atoll were still waiting on the provision of basic facilities.

Clean drinking water, efficient sewerage systems and developed harbours were among many of the requests made, the President’s Office website stated.

Whilst noting that these facilities are basic rights, Waheed told the inhabitants of Dhevvadhoo that the government was committed to accommodate these needs.

However, speaking in Kan’duhulhudhoo, Waheed admitted that a lot of the time was given to less important things.

Waheed also noted the importance at present for Maldivians to minimise internal conflicts, lessen political colours and instead raise the national flag above all voices.

Waheed’s visit to Gaafu Alifu Atoll comes after the Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) – including former President Mohamed Nasheed – recently completed their ‘Journey of Pledges’ to the northern Atolls of the country.

The MDP visited over 40 islands to hear the needs of people, and to find out how many of their pledges had been fulfilled both during Nasheed’s presidency and after his controversial transfer of power on February 7.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Comment: Through the looking glass

‘Democracy, freedom, human rights have come to have a definite meaning to the people of the world which we must not allow any nation to so change that they are made synonymous with suppression and dictatorship.’ Eleanor Roosevelt, September 28, 1948.

The Soviet dictator, Joseph Stalin allegedly said that ‘The death of a man is a tragedy; the death of millions is a statistic.”

Although this may be attributed to his lack of humanity, it also makes a salient point about the nature of 20th century dictatorships. Like Pol Pot and Mao Zedong, Stalin belonged to an exclusive group of dictators who wielded enormous power and exterminated millions of people who stood in their way.

Although Gayoom’s dictatorship in the Maldives was never in the same league, the political constructs were the same: the monopoly of the press, iron-fisted control of the judicial system, one party rule and the torture of political opponents as a tactic to stay in control.

However, in the late 1970s, just as Gayoom was beginning to spread his tentacles of power in the Maldives, globally, the tide began to turn in favour of democratic ideals. The fundamental concepts of life, liberty, justice, equality and the notion of the common good made a come-back. Concurrently, the word ‘dictator’ which was synonymous with absolute power and authority, became a term of ridicule, of derision, signalling an appalling inability to change with changing times.

But have dictatorships, like the famous parrot immortalised by Monty Python, ceased to be, expired and gone to meet their maker and become bereft of life? Have they kicked the bucket, run down the curtain and gone to join the bleeding choir invisible?

There are two realities that people of liberal persuasion must grasp. Firstly, despite the Arab Spring and strong forward movements by democratic ideals, conservatism as a trend has re-asserted itself. The Empire has struck back, nurturing the same ideology but armed with a different set of tools. It has reinvented itself and like a chameleon, reappeared in a different guise; one that is more in tune with the 21st century political landscape.
Secondly, and most importantly, democracy is worth fighting for. Its defining characteristics of justice, inclusiveness and equality are universal values that give dignity to human life. Despite the slow encroachment of conservative and elitist ideologies, democracy is not finished, it is close at hand and its worth demands our sacrifice.

But beware! Today’s dictator is not in a uniform covered in gold-plated medals; nor is he an object of ridicule generating derisive laughter. He is well spoken, cosmopolitan and media savvy. His CV and certificates on the wall may indicate strong academic connections that validate his claim to good governance and commitment to progressive ideals. He is Putin of Russia. He is Mohamed Morsi of Egypt. He is Mohammed Waheed Hassan of the Maldives. They are the new face of dictatorships in the 21st century.

Shimon Peres, one of the recipients of the Nobel Peace Prize in 1994 said, “Today, if you are looking for a safe job, don’t become a dictator.” The world has become less forgiving of human rights abuse, torture and mass killings. Dictators not only have to show restraint in their own personal inclinations and hide their draconian political agendas, but they also have to dress their actions in a different style. Thus the art of equivocation has been perfected by modern dictators. They understand that excessive violence in the tradition of Tiananmen Square is no longer possible, but they still relentlessly punish their opponents. They stand behind what seems a set of progressive laws, but they are masters of the selective application of these.

Waheed’s government in the Maldives provides an almost text-book study of this type of dictatorship; its creative double-talk masking its overwhelming cruelty and desperate grasping for control.

His search for legitimacy and global recognition came early. One of his first political engagements was to write to heads of states to explain why he was forced to take over power. He proactively set the scene: here was a man of reason, who could articulate his noble intentions in rational and practical terms; here was a man who could be trusted to work with the international body. However, almost simultaneously, on his home-turf, the members of his police and the armed forces, who helped to place him in the presidency, were executing a reign of terror, previously unseen in the Maldives.

According to a reply written to Waheed’s letter by Mike Mason, the Energy adviser to President Nasheed, Waheed is ‘committed to Maldives and Democracy.’ But Mason fails to distinguish between a simplistic, self-indulgent, self-deluding belief in democracy on the one hand and the physical responses and actions which totally destroy democracy on the other hand. Mason simply underlines what many of us know – Waheed is a superficial individual who lacks the intelligence to see beyond his rhetoric. He has never demonstrated his commitments to democratic principles.

Proof of this can be seen in his rewarding the armed forces with resort islands, promoting and increasing their salaries as opposed to bringing to justice the police and defence force members who brutally attacked innocent Maldivians and vandalised public property. The proposed budget for 2013 would see an increase of the defence spending by 14 percent. Instead of promoting democracy he is paving the way to a military dictatorship. All signs indicate that such a fate is not far.

Meanwhile, the IMF mission, in November this year spoke of ‘a ballooning fiscal deficit’ the effects of which are felt by the average Maldivians who are struggling, not simply because of the global economic recession, but due to the moribund economy based on the debilitating corruption and nepotism condoned by the Waheed, Gayoom, Military consortium. In doing so he is destroying meritocracy, the civil service, the level playing field and the acceptance of differences that exist in a true democracy.

Waheed speaks of Maldives as ‘a damn good democracy’, yet he has denied the people their call for an early election, disregarding the advice by international bodies such as the EU and the Commonwealth to do so. There are increasing allegations by MPs that his government’s bullying tactics are creating a ‘climate of fear’ in the People’s Majlis.

Ostensibly he stands for tolerance, yet his bedfellows and support base include the Salafists. The country is fast sliding into a fundamentalist nightmare where an Adhaalath ( The Islamist party) aligned MP has recently gone so far as to call for one of his opponents to be ‘hanged to death’. Journalist and writer, Azra Naseem, points out that in ‘a damned good democracy’ the president describes his Islamist supporters as ‘Mujaheddin, fighting a Holy War.” All these add to the climate of intolerance, hatred and escalating violence.

New age dictators like Waheed claim to stand for law and justice. The Maldives for instance, has a constitution. But the new dictator of the 21st century is adept in the selective application of this justice. Putin for example uses his fire and health regulations to close down opposition radio stations and newspapers. But the same rules are not applied to his supporters. In the Maldives also, justice is used to destroy opponents; and this together with the failure to bring to justice more urgent cases that need addressing, creates a tangible state of injustice.

Waheed’s main focus is to prevent the former president, Mohamed Nasheed, from participating in the next elections. Meanwhile the immensely corrupt judicial system and the Chief Judge of the Criminal Court, Judge Abdulla Mohamed continue to high-jack any efforts to make progress in this all important sector of the state.

Like the dictators of the past, Waheed continues to use propaganda to white-wash the actions of his government and its supporters. However, the style today is more subtle. The regime’s narrative is disseminated in a two- pronged programme. The first and the most expensive, and possibly the least effective, has been the employment of the Ruder Finn PR company at a cost of US$150,000 a month. Fortunately for the seekers of truth, the contract was terminated in November this year: it is not clear whether the bankrupt Maldivian government ran out of money to fund this type of expensive hobbies, or that the company came to the inevitable conclusion that some clients are just too toxic for it to be associated with.

The second, and the most direct, has been the narrative constructed by the regime: the building of metaphors, the framing of issues and the controlling of the political dialogue that help their cause. Here MDP is depicted as an aggregate of drug taking, alcohol swilling people who lack any respectability. Nasheed is attacked personally and presented as a cynical opportunist who uses the democratic platform to get to power for personal gain. We have to ask why?

Is this because they have no other way of attacking Nasheed? Could it be that his actions, unlike the words of the dictator, speak louder? During the three short years under MDP, a comprehensive system of old age pension was introduced and access to health care for all Maldivians improved. For the first time, the outlying islands began to get the recognition and support they deserve. There was development in infrastructure. Travel between the islands was upgraded with a more efficient transport network and the fiscal deficit, the legacy of neglect of Gayoom’s regime, was attended to. In 2010 IMF reported that ‘the government of Maldives has put together and is implementing a set of essential fiscal adjustment measures’, but in April 2012 under Waheed, it raised “grave concerns for the Maldives economy.”

It is not surprising that in the recent by-election in Raa Atoll, a regime stronghold, MDP support shot up by 120 percent. It is obvious that they cannot attack the actions of their opponents, so they are reduced to attacking the people involved.

Waheed’s political vicissitude does nothing to inspire confidence, either in his own people or in international stake-holders. Some see his failure as a result of the hand he was dealt with, which was “almost impossible to play.” Others question his intelligence; the type of intelligence that functions when cocooned in an ivory tower, is different to that which is required in running a state. Some comment on his poor work ethic or his inability to commit to any one objective. Perhaps there are elements of truth in all these, but the defining weakness is in his ideological stand.

Dictators may appear to have made a come-back. But within their success in reinventing themselves, and gaining support though the dangerous game of deception, lie the seeds of their own destruction. A dictatorship is a dictatorship, however it is packaged.

Abraham Lincoln was believed to have said, “You can fool some of the people all of the times, and all of the people some of the time, but you cannot fool all of the people all of the time.”

The new-age dictator cannot have it both ways. Despite ‘candid’ letters and high sounding rhetoric, a dictatorship is not a democracy and we must never let ambitious despots use democratic jargon to gain legitimacy.

The passage of time has become the greatest witness to Waheed’s failure. Nine months has elapsed since the coup and the political and social landscape is littered by the fall-out of his inability to lead. Violence has escalated, government influence of the media has increased and Islamic fundamentalism has been allowed to grow into a forceful political power. Even Waheed has been forced to admit that “everybody runs the state as they please.”

Personal freedoms have declined as has the standard of living of the majority of Maldivians. The state is bankrupt and the government’s financial and political supporters cannot seem to grasp the simple fact that the Maldives is a vulnerable, small state that needs the goodwill of its neighbours.

Crucially in this political wilderness, the police and the armed forces have been permitted to do as they please. Time has shown that Waheed’s brand of dictatorship is not working. This begs the question: will he move up to the next level of dictatorship and use more force or, while he is procrastinating and thinking of the appropriate rhetoric, will the police and the armed forces take the initiative and establish themselves as a military government? Sadly, none of these impending eventualities are in the best interest of the people of the Maldives. But, these are the only two alternatives for Waheed’s government.

There is room for optimism, however. The greatest danger to dictators has never been the well-meaning bureaucrats hidden behind glass windows of high rise buildings. The most feared opposition to injustice and authoritarian rule has always been the ordinary people. Democracy, as an ideology is global. Its strengths are firmly embedded in universal and timeless ethical values. It is not simply a convenient aphorism to claim that human progress towards its full potential has little to do with technology and materialism but has everything to do with the way we learn to treat each other. Democracy is a potent force that will not be beaten. As Victor Hugo said, “There is one thing stronger than all the armies in the world, and that is an idea whose time has come.”

As the world slides down to economic recession, the opposing forces of democracy and dictatorship are equally balanced globally as they are in the Maldives. The traditional caretakers of democracy, America, Europe and the Commonwealth, are focused largely on the internal, economic problems of their respective nations. It would appear that the coast is clear for men who lust for absolute power, to seize the moment.

However, paradoxically, economic hard-times can also make the self- interest of dictators and the lifestyles of their elitist friends stand out in stark contrast to the poverty and the struggle of the ordinary man on the street. The masses, no longer kept distracted by ‘bread and circus.’ can rise again.

Nothing is as powerful as the will of the people.

All comment pieces are the sole view of the author and do not reflect the editorial policy of Minivan News. If you would like to write an opinion piece, please send proposals to editorial@minivannews.com

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Cabinet voids US$511 million GMR contract, gives airport developer seven day ultimatum to leave

Additional reporting by Neil Merrett and Mohamed Naahii.

The Maldivian cabinet has declared the agreement with Indian infrastructure giant GMR to develop Ibrahim Nasir International Airport (INIA) void, and has given the company a seven day ultimatum to leave the country.

“The government has given a seven day notice to GMR to leave the airport. The agreement states that GMR should be given a 30 day notice but the government believes that since the contract is void, it need not be followed,” said Attorney General (AG) Azima Shukoor.

During a press conference on Tuesday evening, Shukoor stated that the government reached the decision after considering “technical, financial and economic” issues surrounding the agreement.

The attorney general claimed the government had obtained legal advice from “lawyers in both the UK and Singapore as well as prominent local lawyers – all who are in favour of the government’s legal grounds to terminate the contract.”

“We also got advice from both local and international lawyers in the Maldives Airports Company Limited (MACL),” she added.

Shukoor said the government had two legal grounds to terminate the contract: one in which the government believed the contract was ‘void ab initio’ – meaning to be treated as invalid from the outset; and the second being ‘frustration’, an English contract law doctrine which acts as a device to set aside contracts where an unforeseen event either renders contractual obligations impossible, or radically changes the party’s principal purpose for entering into the contract.

“The contract is governed by the English contract law. The government believes that the agreement is void ab initio meaning the contract was void from the beginning or the contract is frustrated,” she said.

She added the termination of the agreement was a “purely legal decision” and did not have any connection with the recent series of anti-GMR protests headed by the religious Adhaalath Party (AP).

The decision was, Shukoor insisted, made “professionally” and after “thorough research”.

Shukoor also claimed the government was going to initiate the arbitration process in Singaporean Courts and had already informed its decision to both GMR and MACL.

Asked how the government planned fund the estimated US$700 million in compensation for terminating the contract, Shukoor declined to speak of the sum of money but expressed “full confidence” in winning a court battle.

“We were advised by very professional lawyers including Queen’s Counsels (QC). We have full confidence in winning the case,” she said.

“We do not intend to share all our legal arguments in this press conference. Please do respect that decision,” she added.

“Completely irrational”: GMR

GMR has slammed cabinet’s decision as “unilateral and completely irrational”.

“This unlawful and premature notice on the pretext that the concession agreement is ‘void’ is completely devoid of any locus standi and is therefore being challenged by the company before the competent forums. The company disputes that the concession agreement is ‘void’,” GMR said in a statement.

“The company would further like to state that it has taken all measures to continue operations at the Ibrahim Nasir International Airport thereby ensuring that this vital gateway to Maldives is kept open.

“We would also like to inform all that this action by the government of the Maldives is in complete disregard of and has been done during the pendency of arbitration proceedings in the designated tribunal in Singapore. We are therefore taking all measures to ensure the safety of our employees and safeguard our assets. We are confident that the stand of the company will be vindicated in every way.”

Speaking to Minivan News, GMR Executive Vice President & Group Head of Corporate Communications, Arun Bhaghat, said the only reason for the decision as stated in the government’s letter was that the airport development charge had been ruled unleviable by the Civil Court, and therefore the entire contract was void.

In late 2011 the then-opposition Dhivehi Qaumee Party (DQP) filed a successful Civil Court case blocking GMR from charging an Airport Development Charge (ADC) – a US$25 charge for outgoing passengers stipulated in the concession agreement – on the grounds that it was a tax not authorised by parliament.

Nasheed’s administration chose to honour the original contract, and instructed GMR to deduct the ADC revenues from the concession fees due the government, while it sought to appeal the Civil Court ruling.

However, the Nasheed government fell a month later and the opposition inherited the result of its court victory, receiving a succession of bills from the airport developer throughout 2012, despite the government’s insistence that the January 5 letter from MACL outlining the arrangement was no longer valid.

In the first quarter of 2012 the government received US$525,355 of an expected US$8.7 million, after the deduction of the ADC. That was followed by a US$1.5 million bill for the second quarter, after the ADC payable eclipsed the revenue due the government.

Combined with the third quarter payment due, the government now owes the airport developer US$3.7 million.

“The net result of this is that the Maldivian government now has to pay GMR for running the airport. On this basis it is likely that the Maldivian government will end up paying about MVR 8 billion (US$519 million) to GMR for the duration of the contract,” wrote Dr Hassan Saeed, DQP Leader and President Mohamed Waheed’s Special Advisor, in a recent appeal to Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh calling on him to cancel the Maldives’ agreement with GMR and warning the Indian PM of “rising extremism” as a result of the GMR deal and anti-Indian sentiment.

GMR attempted to compromise by offering to exempt Maldivian nationals from the ADC, with GMR Chairman G M Rao personally mailing Waheed with the offer, but claimed to have received no response from the government.

“This is by far the single largest foreign investment in the Maldives at US$511 million – in today’s figures, 40-50 percent of the Maldives’ GDP,” observed Bhaghat, adding that the company was supremely confident of defending its legal position.

“We have no plans to go. We have 23 more years here,” he said, vowing that the cabinet’s decision would have “no effect” on the operation of the airport.

“The defence force in this wonderful country is well geared to ensure smooth operation of the airport,” Bhaghat told Minivan News.

India backs GMR: “All necessary measures”

The government of India “proposes to monitor the situation in Maldives closely and is prepared to take all necessary measures to ensure the safety and security of its interests and its nationals in the Maldives,” India’s Ministry of External Affairs has meanwhile said in a statement.

“We have noted the decision by the Government of Maldives to terminate the agreement with the GMR Group to manage the Male International Airport. It would be recalled that the consortium consisting of GMR and MAHB (Malaysian Airport Authority) had been awarded the contract to manage the Male’ International Airport concession through a global tender conducted by the International Finance Corporation (IFC), Washington, a member of the World Bank.

“As the Advisor to the Government of Maldives, the IFC has stated that it has complied with Maldivian laws and regulations and followed international best practices at each step of the bidding process to ensure the highest degree of competitiveness, transparency and credibility of the process,” the statement read.

“The investment by GMR represents the single largest foreign direct investment in the history of Maldives. The decision to terminate the contract with GMR without due consultation with the company or efforts at arbitration provided for under the agreement sends a very negative signal to foreign investors and the international community. The Government of India would continue to remain engaged with the Government of Maldives on this issue, and would expect that the Government of Maldives would fulfil all legal processes and requirements in accordance with the relevant contracts and agreement it has concluded with GMR in this regard.”

“Destabilising the country”: MDP

The Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) has meanwhile accused cabinet of destabilising the country by attacking foreign investment and supporting “extremist” rhetoric.

“This decision is bad for tourism, bad for the economy and bad for the Maldivian people,” said former President Mohamed Nasheed.

“Waheed’s government has cynically used xenophobia, nationalism and religious extremism to attack GMR, the country’s largest foreign investor. This will put off potential investors for decades. Waheed is leading the Maldives down the path to economic ruin,” he stated.

MDP MP and Spokesperson Hamid Abdul Ghafoor told Minivan News that disputed contracts could be unravelled through a legal process, but said the executive’s decision to void the contract and evict the country’s single largest foreign investor was not backed by any law.

“If cabinet has now decided to revoke the contract, who is going to execute the order? The contract is bound under international law. The case is still being heard by a court of arbitration in Singapore,” Ghafoor said.

“Will police be executing this order to reclaim the airport, or will it be Islamist elements? This is an executive decision that is being taken without any legal or political backing.”

Maldives National Defence Force (MNDF) Spokesperson Colonel Abdul Raheem said the military was “not involved” in the airport issue: “We will however, continue to take care of security [at the site] and look after it,” he said.

Police Spokesperson Sub-Inspector Hassan Haneef told Minivan News that any decision to enforce the decision would have to be directed by the President’s Office.

Decision prompted by “extremists”

Ghafoor claimed that threats of direct attacks on foreign investors reflected what he was the growing role of extremist Islamic thinking within the most senior decision making of the present government.

Raising concerns over the legality of voiding the GMR contract, Ghafoor pointed to recent comments in local media by the government-aligned religious Adaalath party, whose president Sheikh Imran Abdulla was yesterday quoted as threatening to “invade the runway” should the government not renege on the airport agreement.

“The deal was done very transparently, and [the government] have never been able to prove any wrongdoing,” Ghafoor claimed. “Yet, what is most worrying is that we have the cabinet of what we believe is an illegitimate government that is being influenced by extremist influences.”

Ghafoor alleged that the government’s decision over the GMR issue was being driven by former President Maumoon Abdul Gayoom’s Progressive Party of Maldives (PPM), Adhalaath Party President Sheikh Imran and fellow party member and Minister of Islamic Affairs, Sheikh Mohamed Shaheem Ali Saeed.

“We are now seeing the government partnering with and backing the rhetoric of a movement led by an Islamist group, it is very apparent what is going on here,” he said.

MP Ghafoor further claimed that parliament had, as of this evening, received no information on the decision to renege on the GMR agreement, adding that several no-confidence motions against senior government figures including President Waheed were scheduled.

“What is going on right now is a shift in parliament,” he said.

Ghafoor also claimed that beyond the potential legal and economic ramifications of reneging on the sovereign agreement with GMR, rumours of a Chinese intermediary stepping in to cover possible financial consequences could significantly affect the Maldives internationally.

“In terms of geopolitics, we are hearing about a Chinese connection to the [airport issue] that does not put the country in a comfortable position,” Ghafoor claimed. “Ideologically and culturally we have much closer ties to India than China.”

Returning from a visit to China back in September, President Dr Mohamed Waheed Hassan told reporters that Chinese aid to the Maldives would not be limited to a US$500million (MVR7.7billion) loan finalised earlier this year.

Waheed revealed at the time that the Chinese government had pledged to make all necessary aid available to the Maldives, including assistance with road and shipping development, local media reported at the time.

Regarding China’s view on Maldivian politics, Waheed noted that the Chinese were amongst the first nations to recognise his unity government.

“The Chinese Prime Minister personally told me that he had full confidence and support for the Maldivian government,” Waheed was reported as saying.

However, the Maldives government this evening dismissed suggestions that China would be taking a role in any future airport development.

“On this matter, China is as far away from the airport development as is physically possible,” said Presidents Office Media Secretary Masood Imad.

Troubled airport agreement

The agreement with the GMR-Malaysia Airports Holdings Berhad consortium was signed on June 28, 2010 with the Nasheed administration, following a bidding process conducted by the World Bank’s International Finance Corporation (IFC).

The GMR-MAHB consortium narrowly beat Turkish-French consortium TAV Holdings-Aéroports de Paris Management (ADPM), scoring a final Net Present Value (NPV) score of 495.18 to the runner up’s 454.04 at conclusion of the bid.

GMR’s win was based on playing to the government’s highest-scoring factors – fuel share revenue and upfront payment – at the expense of non-fuel related airport revenue.

As part of its successful bid, GMR paid the government US$78 million and 1 percent of non-fuel revenue and 15 percent of fuel revenue for 2011-2014, increased to 10 percent and 27 percent respectively for 2015-2025. The developer at the time anticipated that additional services and duty free development for the country’s well-heeled clientele, as well as the Maldives’ tourism growth potential, would offset the risks of the higher fuel share.

Opposition parties at the time the agreement was signed – and are now in government following February 7’s controversial transfer of power – first opposed GMR’s development of the airport on nationalistic grounds, and then levelled numerous allegations against the company ranging from corruption to concerns that the deal would allow Israeli bombers to refuel en route to bombing Arab countries.

Further protests occurred in December 2011 after GMR ceased renewing lease agreements of several existing airport duty free operators, notably duty-free liquor store Alpha-MVKB.

The High Court upheld at the time that since GMR had given notice on March 1, 2011 and, as per the agreement, the contract had been terminated on March 31. The court concluded that MVK had no right to remain at the airport without approval from GMR, and began packing up the store’s contents on December 4. Following the eviction, MVK CEO Ibrahim Shafeeq accused GMR of breaking into his shop and stealing his stock, and then launched a ‘Go Home GMR’ protest.

As tension with the developer increased, President Waheed’s cabinet attacked the IFC as “irresponsible” and “negligent” in conducting the bidding process.

The IFC denied the accusations, stating that its advice was geared towards achieving the “objective of upgrading the airport and ensuring compliance with applicable international regulations” and providing the Maldives government “with the maximum possible revenue”.

The stand-off escalated in early August 2012 following a stop work order on the new terminal development, after the government alleged certain planning permissions had not been obtained from the Civil Aviation Authority.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)