Category: Guest Contributors

Consciousness and the Development Paradigm

Leftover Illustration

Illustration by Ahmed Fauzan

“ No problem can be solved from the same level of consciousness that created It. ” – Albert Einstein 

by Salma Fikry

Here I am traveling in Denmark, in a rickety van, cramped together with people from all around the world trying to learn about sustainable development. From the Freetown of Christiania in Copenhagen to the remote island of Samsoe to the appropriately entitled Friland (Freeland) near Arhus, I found people trying to return to the very roots that they came from.

I try to understand why Pia and Johan have chosen to live in a caravan with their two children for the past three years while their ‘home’ is being built on “The Self-Sufficient Village”, using second-hand material. I try to understand the purposefulness in Mai, the gentle but strong woman with whom I cooked a meal for 70 people for the dinner they have as a community four days a week. She chose to build her own house with her bare hands when she could have got hired help or a construction company to do it. I try to understand why Christiania (Freetown) functions with its community rules and community spirit, even while not having any elected body to oversee those rules or foster that community spirit. I try to comprehend why Soren and Anna, the sophisticated and obviously wealthy couple, chose to built their own home, with recycled material and live in the remoteness of Halingelille. I am amazed at the leadership of Soren Hermanson, an Environment Teacher who mobilized the Samsingers to turn the island of Samso into a model of Renewable Energy, no longer dependant on fuel from the mainland.

Sadly, they are just a few. They are just a handful of people in the Global North, seeking to reverse the harm done. The majority is still driven by ideologies of capitalism and democracy, propagated by institutions and powerful nations that brought ruin to many of our life-systems in the Global South.

In the search for superiority and certainty, the Global North taught us to split subject from object – res cogitans – thinking substance, consciousness was separated from res extensa – matter, the physical universe. Monotheistic religions taught us that Man was superior to all else in the world and everything in the universe was there to satisfy Man. Devoid of soul, the material world was investigated like a machine, vivisected and exploited through colonialism, Newtonian physics, the industrial revolution and more recently through vehicles of globalization. Thus developed our contemporary development paradigm.

We were given engineering and mechanization plans and money for capital-intensive infrastructure development as the key to alleviating poverty. In doing so, we pushed ourselves into the concrete jungles of cities, where clean air and water became a commodity to be bought and sold. We were forced to give up traditional livelihoods and millions were made jobless. In doing so our self-sufficiency was converted to the laws of demand and supply, driven by market forces. We were told that norms should be prescribed into Constitutions and Laws in order to ensure participation of people. In doing so, millions of years of traditions, social norms and social contracts that were sacred and unwritten in the Global South, were eroded.

And here we are now. We now regard the environment and our communities as a problem to be solved. We look for technological and institutional innovations. Few of us stop to ponder that it is neither the environment nor the lack of institutions that is the problem. The problem was and is Us. It is our individual mindsets and habits that have contributed to Collective Ruin. Our level of consciousness is such that we have moved from exploiting resources for human comfort, to trying to develop systems where technology and democracy can revert the degradation that we ourselves have brought to our environment and our once thriving participatory communities. We fail to realize that the environment has its secrets and it will outlast us; it is the fittest in the great scheme of things where we are the weakest link, especially when we are not united by the bonds that make us a community.

As I sit in the community dinners with old and young alike, who come from varied backgrounds, talking about their vision and plans for the community, talking about the chores for the next day, I become nostalgic. I remember how I used to belong to and live under one roof with an extended family. I remember how the neighborhood got together to mark festivals, clean the road, celebrate a birth or mourn a death. It was not so long ago. Life has changed now, although there are a few remnants of what it was like before. I remember how inspired I was working in small communities when people came whole-heartedly to participate in community projects to renovate their school, to build their sea-wall, to clean their roads, to build their water tanks, to do a lot of things that were deemed as ‘collective’– for the service and enjoyment of everyone and not a few. There were no laws subscribed, they did it voluntarily. Ironical that I, who found it so beautiful had wanted to and worked to ‘institutionalize’ this aspect of social capital not knowing that I would be contributing to consolidating ‘power and politics’ into the hands of a few.

I realize painfully, that our mindsets, mine included, and our development paradigm remains at the same level of consciousness as those that crafted this vicious cycle of rootless growth, a few thousand years ago.

It is the level of consciousness that we have made many mistakes, that we need to rectify the harm done and rise above our individual mindsets to develop a new paradigm, a new life system for our world that strikes me in the eco-villages. Perhaps, Pia , Johan, Mai, Soren, Anna and Hermanson reached a new level of consciousness in order to do what they are doing now. Sadly, I have not reached that level of consciousness yet. My mindset is changing but it is not totally there yet…

Salma Fikry advocates decentralised governance and sustainable development through community empowerment. She wrote the above in November 2010, while on a study trip to Denmark. She has a Master’s in Development Management. She is a recipient of the National Award of Recognition for her services towards improving good governance in the Maldives.

If you are worried about the government’s plans to concentrate all development in the ‘Greater Male’ Area’ while ignoring all other parts of the country, sign the Avaaz petition and lobby the government for more sustainable ways that would decrease rather than increase the inequalities that currently exist among the Maldivian population.

Mutiny of the State: Maldives gets away with another coup d’état

VelTwitter

by Aishath Velezinee

A year ago the Supreme Court of the Maldives reigned supreme. The court, and at times the Chief Justice alone, ran wild with “the powers of the Supreme Court” citing Article 145 (c) for Supreme Court interference in all manner of issues. Article 268 on supremacy of the Constitution binds the Supreme Court too. But both the Supreme Court and Parliament majority were willfully blind to this as they got their way, citing the Constitution to justify outrageous breaches of the Constitution.

Few among the general public in a polity with a history of authoritarian rule and unfamiliar with the concept of the rule of law understood contraventions of the Constitution, especially when the breaches were blatantly defended by the Supreme Court. In the absence of a culture of democracy it was often reduced to whatever the “majority” decided, by hook or by crook. To win was the ultimate goal in elections as well as in litigation, no matter how. Reason by the minority was drowned out and, with the Supreme Court politicised and the Parliament majority with the President, an Executive dictatorship reigned in the shadow of the supreme Supreme Court.

The gravity of the situation became visible to the public and the international community during the 2013 presidential elections, when the Supreme Court repeatedly intervened in the election process, often working the graveyard shift and issuing midnight decrees and directives to control the elections. Polls were nullified and voting was repeatedly rescheduled to ensure an election win for Abdulla Yameen Abdul Gayoom, half-brother of the 30-year dictator Maumoon Abdul Gayoom. Why the Supreme Court may have had an interest in seeing Yameen as the president may be seen in Yameen’s statement to the Commission of National Inquiry (CoNI) that decided the 7 February 2012 coup was not a coup

Soon after the presidential elections, the Supreme Court also facilitated a win for President Yameen’s Progressive Party of Maldives (PPM) in parliamentary elections, removing the Elections Commissioner and his deputy in the first suo moto case, suo moto vs Elections Commission of Maldives. The Elections Commissioner was accused of contempt of the Court and undermining the powers of the Supreme Court.

During the election campaign President Yameen, like PPM MPs in their campaigns, pledged to protect the judiciary from interference, condemning the local and international calls for judicial reform as “interference in the judiciary”. The Supreme Court is the highest authority, the bearer of the last word in all matters of law, and none had the power to criticize or demand reform of the judiciary, both the Supreme Court and President Yameen agreed.

Dismissive of all expert reports on the Maldives judiciary, the Supreme Court adopted contempt of court regulations to prohibit media and public criticism and went as far as to initiate court action against the Human Rights Commission of the Maldives (HRCM) in suo moto vs HRCM, charging all members of the HRCM with high treason for their 2014 report to the Universal Periodic Review (UPR) for noting Supreme Court unduly influences and controls the judiciary.

Chief Justice Ahmed Faiz Hussain played his cards to win. From giving oath to Vice President Dr. Mohamed Waheed Hassan Manik without question and legitimising the 7 February 2012 coup d’état to guaranteeing a win for coup-leader Yameen in the 2013 elections, facilitating a PPM majority in Parliament and remaining silent while PPM majority systematically undermined the Constitution and ruled by law instead of upholding the rule of law, Faiz never faltered.

None of these mattered when on Monday, 14 December 2014 when, following an amendment to the Judicature Act which required the Supreme Court bench to be reduced from seven to five justices, the PPM majority in Parliament removed from the bench Chief Justice Faiz and Justice Muthasim Adnan—the only voice of reason, and often only voice of dissent from majority opinion in the court.

PoliceJangiya

Supreme Court Justice and Chief of the Interim Supreme Court Abdulla Saeed who I maintain engineered hijacking of the judiciary in 2010 in what I have since called the silent coup, was rewarded with the title of Chief Justice. Solemnising the historic oath of the new Chief Justice was none other than Supreme Court Justice Ali Hameed whose white underpants made international headlines after the Court ruled against display of white underpants in public protests. The white pants became a protest prop against Justice Ali Hameed after videos of the judge with foreign sex workers in a hotel in Colombo, Sri Lanka, went viral on the internet.

The Final Nail in the Coffin

Amendments to the Judicature Act were passed by the Parliament majority on Wednesday and ratified by President Yameen on Thursday.

Under the new amendments two judges were to be removed from the Supreme Court to reduce the bench from seven to five Justices; and the High Court bench is to be chopped in three equal parts, with three of the nine justices assigned to three geographical regions. A total of 43 MPs voted for the change, all members of PPM the government majority, and errant members of the opposition.

Within hours of ratification, the Judicial Service Commission (JSC) who had staunchly refused to assess or remove a single judge as required for the de facto transition under Constitution Article 285, announced a decision to submit names of Chief Justice Ahmed Faiz Hussain and Justice Muthasim Adnan for removal. No reasons were given as to why or how the JSC reached the decision to remove them. The media was simply told it was a secret decision and that the Commission had decided not to reveal procedure or reason.

On Saturday, while the opposition, senior lawyers, commentators, media, social media activists, CSOs, the public and even the Civil Court declared the amendments to the Judicature Act unconstitutional and illegitimate, politicians “bargained” to win the two-third simple majority required to remove a judge.

On Sunday, the State worked overtime. Sunday morning, while opposition-led protests were kept at a distance by Police barricades around the Parliament building, government MPs with Parliament majority voted to remove Chief Justice Ahmed Faiz Hussain and Justice Muthasim Adnan. MDP issued a three-line whip to reject the dismissal of the justices but with at least five opposition MPs making themselves absent from the proceedings, the required two-third simple majority vote was guaranteed. MDP MPs and some JP MPs raised the matter of the unconstitutionality of the amendment to judicature Act—the fact is that Article 154 of the Constitution, under which the Majlis had scheduled to remove the justices, does not permit the removal of a judge except where the Judicial Service Commission finds the person grossly incompetent, or guilty of gross misconduct.  MPs also noted no such report  from the JSC regarding the two judges who were to be removed had been made available to them nor was it on record with the Parliament. It was noted that the only documentation before Parliament was a three-line note from the JSC seeking the removal of Chief Justice Ahmed Faiz Hussain and Justice Muthasim Adanan, and that this was forced upon the JSC by the Parliament with the unconstitutional amendment to the Judicature Act.

Parliament majority leader of PPM spoke for the government, laughing at opposition claims of unconstitutionality, and citing Constitution Article 70 and the powers of the Parliament therein to, in his interpretation, “make any law on any matter and any manner, whenever and wherever Parliament wish”! That there were limits upon the Parliament, and that the Parliament may not enact a law detrimental to the Constitution was lost upon him.

JangiyaaThe vote was won and, Sunday afternoon, it was reported that JSC had proposed Supreme Court Justice Abdulla Saeed for the post of Chief Justice. Sunday evening, Parliament was back in session and Abdulla Saeed was appointed the new Chief Justice with 55 votes. Before midnight, Abdulla Saeed had taken oath.

Amendment to the Judicature Act, execution of amendment on Supreme Court with the dismissal of Chief Justice and another Supreme Court justice, and appointment of a new Chief Justice, was all over before Monday morning, the earliest when the international community could possibly react.

Corrupting of the Judiciary

In 2010, the JSC, supported by then opposition Parliament majority, refused to execute Article 285, and re-appointed all sitting judges en masse. Further, both JSC and opposition MPs misled the public on JSC’s actions leading up to the collective judges’ oath on 4 August 2010, making false claims on the “procedure” as well as the discussions in the closed sittings of the Commission.

The JSC published what it called the  “legal reasoning on the Article 285 decision” speaking of the “human rights of judges” and citing Constitution section 51 (h) and ICCPR Article 14:2 and UDHR Article 11 on rights of the accused, to explain why no sitting judge may be removed for misconduct or failing to be of good character. “No one can be penalized (dismissed) by a retrospective law,” JSC claimed in 2010, the “law” referred to here by the JSC being the Constitution (2008).

The JSC’s decision stood as few protested against it, and complaints to Parliament oversight Committee, the Anti Corruption Commission and the Human Rights Commission on JSC’s treason were ignored or covered up.

The appointment of the Supreme Court too was a political decision influenced by the existing power balance in the Parliament, and the pressure from the international community for “political negotiation and peace”.

Reports of the International Commission of Jurists who probed the issue following appeals in 2010 and the UN Special Rapporteur on Independence of Lawyers and Judges and FIDH who made inquiries after the February 2012 coup d’état all recognise fundamental mis-conceptualizations in appointment of judges and in the use of concepts like independence of the judiciary and the rule of law in the Maldives.

Rule By Law: Precedents in the Maldives

Removal of Chief Justice Ahmed Faiz Hussain and Justice Muthasim Adnan from the Supreme Court bench through amendment legislation is not a first breach. A number of similar unconstitutional actions where political “majority” power reigned supreme have set the precedent. Some major comparable instances are found in the following:

  • Removal of the Chair of the Judicial Service Commission (JSC), High Court Chief Justice Abdul Ghani Mohamed from the JSC through a High Court decree on 21 January 2010. The decision was taken by three of the five High Court Justices while the fourth was on leave, and, without the knowledge of Abdul Ghani himself. The move contravened democratic principles. The JSC did not investigate the misconduct and abuse of power by the three High Court Judges despite the adoption of a motion to do so, and appointed two of the said three High Court justices to the Supreme Court and appointed the third as Chief Justice of the High Court.
  • The legitimisation of JSC’s breach of Constitution Article 285 by the Judicature Act of 10 August 2010 which brought down the standards and qualifications stipulated in the Constitution for judges.
  • The amendment to the Judicature Act on 10 August 2010, the same day it was passed and ratified, to qualify Dr. Ahmed Abdulla Didi for the Supreme Court bench.
  • The legitimisation of the 7 February 2012 coup d’état by majority power in Parliament.
  • The removal of the Auditor General through amendment to the Auditor General’s Act in 2014.

Another coup d’état?

If a coup d’état is understood as hijacking of State powers, and bringing down of legitimate Constitutional government, and/or the derailment of Constitutional government, the Maldives has once again carried out a coup d’état, this time going full circle to complete what I have called earlier the silent coup.

With Monday’s move all State powers are once again with the President who has got himself Parliament majority with the power to write and rewrite law; and the shamelessness to do so without regard to the Constitution, democratic principles, public outrage or international criticism.

With the Supreme Court secured, Parliament is now on fast track, undoing the Constitutional rights and safeguards. Next step will be the elimination of all opposition including independent voices, all by Court order and verdicts, once again by the powers of the Constitution. Where do the people of Maldives go with this case of the mutiny of the state against its’ own Constitution and people?

Author’s Note: All illustrations and photos used in the article are taken from the public response to the issue on social media

 

THE POLITICS OF RILWAN’S DISAPPEARANCE: GANGS, CRIME, POLITICIANS & LAW ENFORCEMENT IN THE MALDIVES

by Aishath Velezinee

A private investigation by Glasgow-based Athena Intelligence and Security into the disappearance of Rilwan (aka Rizwan, @moyameehaa), a Maldivian journalist missing since August 8, 2014, has not led people any closer to finding him nor has it firmly established how he disappeared. Instead, the PI report has opened up the politics of Rilwan’s disappearance.

Today, the interwoven complexities of gangs, religious extremism, politics and organised crime—and the incapacity of law enforcement to address these issues—cannot be ignored. Reaction of politicians, gangs and the Maldives Police Services (MPS) to the Private Invesitgator’s report—commissioned by the Maldivian Democracy Network (MDN) and released on Monday—emphasise these issues. It is starkly obvious in the long-drawn unproductive “search for Rilwan” by the MPS, as much as in their reluctance to speak with or meet the press.

The Private Investigation

The PI report, in fact, has very little new information to disclose. From CCTV footage where Rilwan is last spotted and material already in public domain, the PI identified Ahmed Shiran Saeed and another unnamed man, both said to belong to Kuda Henveiru gang as suspects in Rilwan’s disappearance. Video showing “evidence of possible hostile surveillance being undertaken by two known gang members” is cited as evidence.

Ibrahim Firaq and Aalif Raoof (Arliph Rauf) are named as owners of the only two cars registered in the Maldives that fits the description of a car involved in an abduction that reportedly took place outside Rilwan’s residence at the approximated time of his disappearance. MPS had earlier revealed that two cars had been brought under police custody in relation to Rilwan’s disappearance, but later denied Rilwan was the victim of abduction. There is no report of any other person who disappeared without trace at the time or on the date of Rilwan’s disappearance. So far MPS has not provided the identity of the victim of abduction.

A fifth man named in the report is Ismail Abdul Raheem, a known extremist previously involved in religiously-motivated violent attacks, who had reportedly stalked Rilwan earlier. No direct connection to Rilwan’s disappearance is noted.

The report draws no conclusions except for ruling out suicide or voluntary disappearance. On motives, too, the report has no conclusive information, and considers the possible involvement of major criminal gangs, politicians and religious extremists, referring to available information and past activities.

Three gangs, Buru, “Bosnia”, and Kuda Henveiru are named as possible sources to follow-up. The report cites a series of recent “abductions” of the administrators of a Facebook group called “Colourless”. These cases were not reported to MPS by the victims though they have shared their experience on being invited to speak. They were harassed, intimidated and at least one was physically man-handled by gangsters and religious extremists working together. The alleged gang leader, Muaz, has not denied being involved, in fact he justified his action to his comrades as a “deserved shaking up”.

Possible link to powerful politicians, including government ministers, who reportedly support and use radicalised gangs for personal and political ends is reported as having been brought up by a number of sources. Tourism Minister Ahmed Adeeb, and Defence Minister Mohamed Nazim are named as influential and corrupt politicians, and the name of former Deputy Speaker Ahmed Nazim comes up as having possibly attempted “to draw political capital” from Rilwan’s disappearance:

Following the Subject’s disappearance, in August 2014, it was reported that Ahmed NAZIM, the former Deputy Speaker contacted this reporter and informed him that the Subject had been working on a story to expose the TM  [Tourism Minister Adeeb], for corrupt activity. It was suggested that if Haseen were able to link the Subject’s disappearance with the TM, NAZIM would provide him with evidence of the TM’s corruption.

NazimAdeebThe public alliance of Defence Minister Mohamed Nazim and Tourism Minister Ahmed Adeeb and their shared antagonism of Home Minister Umar Naseer is also noted. Further, Islamic Minister Mohamed Shaheem and Home Minister Umar Naseer are named as having met gang members led by Muaz Hammer aka Gut Mua who is said to have initiated the meetings to discuss their concern “on the growth of secularsm” in the Maldives.

MinisterMeet1The so-called religiously motivated “abductions” of the “Colourless” administrators took place after these meetings which were reported by the Government as “concerned youth” having met the ministers.

MinisterMeet2

The PI report notes they had no access to forensic evidence, and is predominantly based on information from unnamed witnesses and stakeholders gathered from field research using the snowball approach and the cross referencing of these. The purpose of the report, as stated, is “to balance theory and conjecture with fact”.

The Ongoing Search for Rilwan by MPS

The last update from MPS on the investigation into Rilwan’s disappearance on September 16, 2014, translated into English by MPS, reported:

  • The investigation has determined that no one saw Rizwan in Hulhumale’ after 0000 hours on the 7th of August 2014 and that he did not speak to anyone either.

  • CCTV footage shows him entering the Hulhumale’ Ferry Terminal in Male’ at about 0055 hours on the 8th of August and an individual told the Police that they spoke to him while on the ferry.

  • The Police have not found any conclusive evidence linking Rizwan’s disappearance to the incident which occurred near his home on the night of the 7th and the fire in Hulhumale’, which took place on the 15th of August has not been linked to the case either.

  • Additionally, the Police have summoned and interviewed other individuals caught on the CCTV footage of Rizwan that night.

  • About 1235 hours of footage from 157 cameras from 79 locations have been obtained and is being analyzed and the footage points to him last being seen at 0055 hours on the 8th of August at the Hulhumale’ Ferry Terminal.

  • Additionally, 521 minutes of dives have been conducted and a total area of 267197.5 square kilometers have been searched under water, along with 84 vessels.

  • 9 places of residence in Male’ have been searched and about 139 locations in Hulhumale’, including places of residence, warehouses and garages, have been searched.

  • Some guest houses in the islands are also being searched.

  • A total of 128 individuals have been questioned and had their statements taken while 387 individuals were questioned and had information recorded, along with 192 individuals who lived in 77 apartments in Hulhumale’.

Earlier, on September 4, 2014, MPS had revealed two cars were being held with Court Orders in case of disappeared journalist and forensic samples were to be sent abroad for testing; and that passports of four individuals were being held.

MPS reaction to the PI report

On Tuesday evening, MPS reacted strongly to the PI report with a loaded and highly political 13-paragraph press release. The Police statement declared MDN had acted irresponsibly, with intent to mislead the public and to achieve a specific political purpose. It went on to say MDN had committed a “lowly act” with the purpose of defaming certain politicians, and that it intended to shape public opinion a certain way. It also said MPS had formed a special task force and was investigating Rilwan’s disappearance.

The statement condemned MDN revealing the identity of suspects saying MDN had violated the human rights of the said individuals, diminishing their human dignity, creating public hatred against them and putting their safety at risk. MPS also noted that the said individual had “already lodged a complaint asserting MDN release of their personal information had put them in danger”.

It further stated that MPS had noted “some parties are attempting to gather information on the ongoing investigation of MPS through Rilwan’s family and others”, and went on to declare that MPS did not believe that the PI’s work, carried out “in the name of searching for Rilwan” with the backing of some persons, was a legitimate activity. It also declared that the MPS will investigate the investigation, and take necessary action against “those behind” the PI report.

MPS also noted they are professionally trained in advanced countries, naming United States, United Kingdom and Australia, and asserted that they follow international best practice in all investigations and are proficient in investigating crimes ranging from petty crimes to terrorism.

RilwanMarchLast Sunday, following MDN’s announcement of the pending release of the PI’s findings, Commissioner of Police Hussain Waheed—who at the time was visiting Haa Dhaal Atoll with all the pomp of a politician—appeared to be reacting strongly against the #FindMoyameehaa movement led by friends and family of Rilwan.

HusseinWaheedDoAddressing the community, CP Hussain Waheed criticized the public demanding action from Police and is quoted as saying “MPS will not be swayed by people’s demands” and “MPS must not be infenced by any person or a group of persons”. Indirecty he referred to a public rally, #SuvaaluMarch (or Question March), led by family and friends of Rilwan demanding answers to questions related to the police investigation into the disappearance of Rilwan. Opposition leader, former President Mohamed Nasheed, and some senior politicians of Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) had joined the rally to which family of Rilwan had personally written and invited all major parties to join.

MPS response to President Nasheed’s interview to The Independent (UK) was similar, where instead of being concerned and attempting to investigate MPS chose to categorically deny Nasheed’s claim of extremism in the security force in a press release on September 18, 2014. The statement went on to appeal to Nasheed not to defame the security forces “for popularity or public support”.

Reactions to PI Report

NihanTweet1Following the release of the PI report, the parliamentary majority leader, MP Ahmed Nihan of the ruling Progressive Party of Maldives (PPM), publicly ridiculed the #FindMoyameehaa effort with a tweet mocking the attempts to find him and belittling Rilwan’s disappearance. He then went on to shamelessly defend his action despite the wording on the poster he tweeted which contradict his claim it was an innocent act, and argued: “Parliament have done its part by probing the matter through its proper channels. 241 Committee deliberated.” Online supporters of PPM carried the same line, mocking and taunting those concerned about Rilwan’s disappearance.

Haam

In fact, the parliamentary 241-Committee mandated to look into national security services, a permanently closed committee without access to media or public is reported to have passed the case of Rilwan’s disappearance, raised by the opposition Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP), to a sub-committee. The sub-committee has issued no reports and the 241-Committee has not convened since.

Overnight, new twitter accounts sprung up to harass those who speak up to find Rilwan. This is in addition to the regular supporters of government online who continue to see Rilwan’s disappearance a laugh.

President Yameen Abdul Gayoom who has previously refused to comment on Rilwan’s disappearance remained silent, as did the Home Minister Umar Naseer who was outspoken on gangs, drugs and serious crime and their connection to President Yameen in the lead up to 2013 elections. Nasheed, meanwhile, accused leaders of Adhaalath Party, Islamic Minister Mohamed Shaheem and Sheikh Imran of radicalizing youth and promoting extremism through indoctrination and encouragement of vigilante action in the name of Islam. Nasheed went on to claim Rilwan is believed to have been abducted by a radicalised youth.

“Don’t do this to our youth. Don’t make them do all these vile deeds after picking them out individually and leading them astray,” the opposition leader appealed at an MDP rally in Male’ coinciding with the release of the PI report after the scheduled open air rally had been postponed twice due to bad weather.

MDP MP Eva Abdulla who spoke of Rilwan’s disappearance at the same rally received a text message after the event threatening a suicide attack during the next MDP gathering; and vowing to “kill off” MDP members and to fight “to the last drop of blood.”

Meanwhile, Executive Director of MDN, Shahindha Ismail and lawyer of Rilwan’s family Mushfique Mohamed are openly receiving threats, and it requires huge imagination to envision MPS acting on these threats to guarantee the safety of their targets. “Aleef Thuththu Ec”, seen in the photo below asking for information on Shahindha and Mushfique saying “they need to be disappeared”,  is said to be a brother of the Aalif named in the PI report as registered owner of one of the red cars.

AleeThutthu AleeThutthu 2

Gangs, Politicians and Law Enforcement

A rapid assessment of gangs in Male’, published by Asia Foundation in 2012, estimates between 20 and 30 different gangs are active in Male’, an island barely 2.5sq.km in total land area, surrounded by the ocean. It is estimated that there are 50 to 400 members in each of these gangs. 

 

 

Income for many of these gangs are said to come from “exchanges with political actors or business people.” The report found payment is usually in the form of money, but that sometimes alcohol would be provided for gang services such as participation in political protests, starting political riots, destroying property or injuring a third party. “Money is often given to a gang to initiate a fight so as to divert attention from a political issue”, the report states. Politicians or businessmen generally only deal directly with the gang leader and the amount of money exchanged is known only to the gang leader. The member who carries out the contract receives a small portion of the money. Leaders can sometimes get a  monthly income of up to MRF 1 million (USD 65,000) for being on call to carry out a politicians ‘dirty work.’ In extreme cases gang members are given contracts to carry out murder. One member said, “We may be given a file with all the information about the person and be told we may be paid in millions to carry out the killing.” ~ Rapid Assessment of Gangs in Male’, 2012.

The report found gang members had protectors or patrons among powerful politicians who guaranteed law enforcement agencies will leave them alone and that they would be saved from Courts where necessary. A co-dependency is said to exist as gang leaders are aware of illegal and criminal activities of politicians and each depend on the other to achieve their ends.

image

image_1

image_2

image_3

image_4

image_5

image

Serious Concerns

The PI report, the updates provided by MPS on the “ongoing search for Rilwan” and the language and sentiments expressed in other related statements of MPS, and the indisputable fact that it is now nearly 50 days since Rilwan disappeared, gives serious reason for concern about the police investigation. Of immediate critical concern is the unknown situation of Rilwan as the reported “search” by MPS continues without any visibility of such an activity or meaningful updates.

Rilwan’s disappearance, the circumstances surrounding it, the researched yet never addressed relationship between gangs, politicians and crime, and the influence of politics and politicians on law enforcement inclusive of police and the judiciary, makes the situation in Maldives today terrifying. Worse is there is no functional mechanism within the State to stand up to these issues and say, enough is enough.

HusseinWaheedTweet

Current Commissioner of Police in 2013 had tweeted, ‘Police forms a Gang Task Force to prevent and eradicate violent criminal activity. Zero tolerance for gang activity!” but gang crime and the brutality of violent crimes has risen sharply, with stabbings and murders common. Rilwan’s abduction, a crime like no other before this, may not be the last given the criminal environment and the fact that perpetrators of serious crime rarely face justice.

Despite the statements of MPS to the contrary, serious crimes have sharply risen with 31 murders recorded since 2001, ten murders 2012 alone which include the brutal torture and murder of lawyer Ahmed Najeeb and the violent hacking of MP Dr. Afraasheem Ali. A record 27 of these 31 murders remain unsolved.

 

Crime statistics available on MPS website show crime had been steadily on the rise since 2000, and had decreased by as much as 12% in 2010, rising again 5% in 2011 and 15% in 2012.

Not least among concerns is that MPS may be unable, or unwilling, to investigate Rilwan’s disappearance or address serious organized crime. It may indeed be politics, and the involvement of powerful individuals within or with links to Government is preventing MPS from being professional. Just as gang leaders depend on influential politicians, senior law enforcement officials too depend on powerful  individual politicians upon whom their livelihoods depend. When crime rules and silence pays, few would be willing to break out and put their lives and livelihood at risk. They are the fools.

HusseinWaheed2