Sunday, June 28, 2009

The Six Drug lords

Four years and years we have faced with the growing concern of drug abuse in the Maldives. Under the rule of the so called notorious dictator Gayoom and his chief torturer Adam Zahir there was wide spread accusations that the state is behind the huge imports of narcotics into the Maldives.

It is with great expectations of the people that the old guard was got ridden of and the new government was put in place. One was to stop the inflow of narcotics and to establish mechanisms that will enable the arrest and prosecution of the drug lords of Maldives.

During the run up to the last parliamentary elections we heard about six drug lords of whom the Police had ample evidence to prosecute them. The reasons, as stated by the President himself was that the current Administration do not wish to influence the elections as some among the six well know drug lords to this administration was some who were running for the parliament. The President also stressed that just after the elections these drug lords will be arrested.

There was wide spread speculations that among the aforesaid six there will definitely be Gayoom’s brother Yaamin. And several others were finger pointed at.

So, a month after the elections, where are these six drug lords. They are still taking lives of so many youth in Maldives. A lot of parents are still left out to grieve. We still live in constant fear of gang violence that the Police relate to drug dealings and drug abuse.

I believe it is time to the President to speed up this operation and arrest those responsible for the inflow of narcotics into the country. Or like Gayoom is Nasheed’s hands tied as well. We are yet to find out.

Sunday, June 14, 2009

Comment and Analysis: Shelter in the "Other Maldives"

Since my childhood, my siblings and I have been living like refugees. We've been continuously moving from one room to another for shelter. That’s not because we’re real refugees, but because my father refuses to let us into our home.

For the past 14 years, my two sisters, two brothers and I have rented different places from north to south and east to west Male', even though we are Male’ citizens. There wasn't much to distinguish us from immigrant islanders. The only difference was that they’re registered in the registry of Male’ municipality, and we’re registered in my father’s house, G.Shady Ground, which he inherited from our grandfather.

Unfortunately, before giving us any chance to live in it, my father sold our house in two parts. One half was sold in the earlier Maldives, before the 2008 presidential elections, and the second half was sold in the "Other Maldives”.

When we got the news that the second half of our house was sold, we immediately filed the case at High Court. We were very confident that we would win the case for three reasons.
The first reason was that when my father sold our house, he had a minor and two unmarried girls to look after. Under the law, children under the age of 18, as well as unmarried girls, have to be provided with property. Secondly, he sold our house, by giving a false statement to the civil court. For example, he said that his family (including us) was living in Sri Lanka, which wasn’t true. Lastly, he sold our house, even though he had a mortgage for it from the Bank of Maldives.
All of these were in breach of the Land Act, but shockingly, the civil court failed to address the above issues before the verdict.

Before the High Court case, the civil court had declared that my father had legally sold the house. But during our High Court hearings, the court sent a letter suspending the civil court ruling, until the verdict had been announced. During this time, the house still belonged to my father.

Although we had the legal right to move back into our half of the house, the buyer's family did not move out. After holding two protests, demanding to get our house back, my siblings and I were finally able to move into my father’s place. We were sharing a single bedroom from my father’s part of the house, while the rest was occupied by the buyer’s children.
For more than two weeks police were looking after the security, as per request of the buyer.
One night, a team of police arrived at our house, demanding us to leave the place. We responded, saying if we had to leave the room, the buyer should also clear the rest of the rooms, which were on my father’s side. But the police team refused to communicate with us, claiming that the decision was made under a court-issued warrant.

When we refused, dozens of star force police came, and arrested me, my sisters and brother. We were handcuffed behind our backs and taken to Atholhuvehi custodial at around 2am. We were made sit in chairs, handcuffed, facing a wall until early morning.
We were told that there hadn't been a court order for our arrest, but only a command of a “superior person”. After the call for morning Azaan, my eldest sister was released, while the rest of us remained detained. Instead of the morning breakfast, we were welcomed with a special investigation.

Separately, at first, my elder brother was made to fully undress, and then I was as well. Later, both of us were taken to a cell. My youngest sister too was forced to undress. They made her stand up and sit down while naked three times as a punishment. We have since been told that her treatment was highly irregular and have filed a case with the Human Rights Commission Maldives.

In the afternoon, my brother and I were served lunch. We refused to eat it, knowing that my younger sister wouldn’t eat anything, believing that we were hungry. And indeed this was what happened. When we met up with her again, she said she had refused to eat, because she thought that we hadn't been fed.

I never dreamed that I would have to experience such cruel and inhumane things in the "Other Maldives”, but unfortunately, my siblings and I were one of the early victims.

In the afternoon, we were released. Frustration and anger didn’t make us give up. We protested outside the civil court, demanding our rights. Days later, High Court made a ruling in our favour, but once gain the police refused to let us into the house. Instead, the buyer continued living there without adhering to the High Court verdict.

In order to adhere to the High Court ruling, we presented this case to civil court. Before any of the hearings, once again my father presented a case to the civil court to sell the same house to the same buyer.

We had also brought my father’s case to the police, asking for an investigation into providing false details to civil court, when selling our home. Yet it seemed that still the case wasn't considered a big deal.

These things remind me of a quotation from Mother Teresa, which gives us the strength to fight for our rights.

“Hungry not only for bread - but hungry for love. Naked not only for clothing - but naked for human dignity and respect. Homeless not only for want of a room of bricks - but homeless because of rejection.”

Wednesday, June 10, 2009

Biggest IT con artist has been sacked

During the late 90's a chap who used to work for Dhiraagu went from enterprise to enterprise convincing the management that the future of their business is through Information Technology. He was the one who introduced the idea of going to a more IT friendly approach and hence creating a wealth of his own through sale of computers in the name of "Information Technology" at prices twice as high as buying a better configuration from nearby Singapore.

During the millenium bug hype, his company sold, on average, 500-600 computers at markups not less than $1000  each. The entire government and the corporates were entagled in this hype that his company made a huge fortune. 

The next step to him was networking. He has implemented networks at resorts the did not work even on the first day. His policy for partnerships did not bear fruit as his approach for a partnership was more based on "I want it all".

Then came the internet age. Through his not so good guidance and technology knowhow, he led a licensed service provider to its doom. From low level technologies and equipment to false promises to major customers to whom he delivers less than half of the solution promised.

The fate of him should and did end as the community anticipated. He has been sacked form the post of Managing Director of his own company. Though we would like to wish him luck, it is high time everyone learned that he should better find another profession. 

Law can be a good alternative...

Monday, June 8, 2009

The Abdulla Kamaaluddeen Example

People Say - Kamaaluddeen Go Home...
Maumoon Says - Kamaaluddeen come as Minister...
MDP Says -  When People reject, no place in government... So Dictatorship...

People Say - Unimaage' Adhil Go Home...
Anni Says - Unimaage' Adhil come as State Minister...
DRP Says - ???????????????


Friday, June 5, 2009

Cognitive dissonance

How did people who stood in line to vote for a dictator rationalise their decision? It remains a mystery to me. But a blog post, riddled with contradictions, by former legal reform minister Mohamed Nasheed threw up some interesting clues. 

“MDP [Maldivian Democratic Party] must be recognised for the creative thinking behind its propaganda. They were able to convince a great deal of Maldivians that democracy and freedom as available in the western world today should have been available in the Maldives all the way through the past thirty years,” Nasheed writes (Italics mine).

Nasheed dismisses out of hand that his former master Maumoon Abdul Gayoom was a despot responsible for human rights abuses, wanton corruption, and nepotism. Not to mention, 30 years of undemocratic misrule and curtailment of basic rights.

Tracing the history of the democracy movement, which forced Gayoom to enact a sweeping agenda for democratic reform, Nasheed implies that its demands for freedom of expression, an independent judiciary and separation of powers were unwarranted and unreasonable, arguing that the MDP “distorted” the truth to serve its purposes. 

Strangely, Nasheed then acknowledges, and even commends, the success of MDP’s “anti-Gayoom rhetoric”, but goes on to state that the public perception of a dictatorship it fostered was not based on reality.

But, just as he conveniently omits any mention of torture and arbitrary arrest of activists, he does not offer any explanation as to why so many people accepted MDP’s message of liberation from the clutches of a tyrant. But it begs the question, why did it resonate so deeply and “sink into the psyche of the Maldivian people” if it was so wildly exaggerated? 

Ultimately, his argument boils down to a patently absurd narrative: a bunch of restless rabble-rousers misled a sleepy populace to rise up against a benevolent ruler who brought progress and prosperity to the nation.  

The Maldives during Gayoom’s reign might not have been apartheid-era South Africa, but it is still disingenuous to deny that gross injustices took place. It did not happen that long ago either. 

In his blog post, Nasheed further implies that Maldivians were not overly concerned with democracy before MDP came on the scene. As a result of the opposition’s efforts, he says, inalienable rights became important “almost overnight”. 

“Equality before the law, fair share in economy, equitable distribution of wealth, rule of law, fundamental rights, democracy, freedom and many more similar phrases became household expressions. All of a sudden, everybody was conversant in the language of democracy,” he writes.  

It is a common diversionary tactic to ascribe these universal values to the West as if to say social justice does not matter to people east of the Suez Canal.

Moreover, apologists for the former regime excuse police brutality and mass incarceration by saying the old illiberal constitution entitled the president to take such measures. Yet these same people now self-righteously extol the virtues of the democratic principles enshrined in the new constitution.   

According to that logic, morality is derived from laws written on a parchment and changed radically on 7 August 2008, when the constitution was ratified. 

Ironically, although they did not believe it was necessary for 27 years, Gayoom and his party now claim credit for introducing democracy by pointing to a “successful” reform agenda. I am willing to concede that it was indeed successful. It was so successful Gayoom ended up losing his job.

Saturday, May 30, 2009

Making a mockery of democracy

The promise of hope

The work and ideals and the plight of the Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) is admirable to say the least. As an opposition party, it was a monumental force in this country’s fight for change. Despite the lack of democratic guarantees, the vigour and presence of MDP resembled those in South Korea and Pinochet’s Chile, which were directly effective in the country’s governance before democracy was even realised.

In the lead up to the second round of the Presidential elections, in particular the last rally of the then opposition parties, a huge crowd gathered united under flying flags of yellow. Presidential candidate Mohamed “Anni” Nasheed spoke with rare charisma and people felt euphoric and elated.

The entire crowd watching, in their hearts anticipation and a certain sense of trepidation as all hope was invested in this man, who would lead the country to better days. As the rally came to a close, the rain began to pour just as the final blessing was made; everyone put their hands together praying for the future of this country, a move for change.

As the dawn broke on the morning on 29 October 2009, the Maldives broke the rule of a 30 year reign. At ‘raalhugandu’ people from all walks of life gathered together, hugging and crying in jubilation. Anni who had been the symbol, the personification of the democratic movement in this county had been voted our president.

As the days progressed there was a sense of peace in the air, a quiet calm that descended in the country. We all watched as Nasheed gracefully took over from Gayoom who conceded defeat. Nasheed urged everyone to be humble in victory, and so many were proud that the other Maldives had emerged. A country where democracy would begin to flourish, where justice was no longer a vision, rights inviolable and a society free from fear, free from oppression and free from want.

He made us believe that hope was real, emerging from a country whose past filled with darkness and despair, Anni was our hope for the future, and that the democratic ideals of this nation will be fulfilled. The hope of legitimacy and governance that is interested in the everyday interactions of the people. 

How did these hopes and aspirations come to be replaced by disillusionment and persistent cynicism towards a government that symbolised so much?

The slippery slope

Just as it is important to emphasise democracy it is also crucial to safeguard the conditions and circumstances that ensure the range and reach of the democratic process. Valuable as democracy is as a major source of social opportunity there is also the need to examine the ways and means of making it function well, to realise its potentials. It is not whether liberty exists that is important, but how it is exercised.

The operation of the institutions of the state depends on a number of factors. However, one that is of the utmost importance is the legal framework in which political decisions are made; namely the constitution. The development of a democratically accountable and responsible government is enshrined under the structure and principles of the constitution ratified last year.

This government should be focused on preserving the sanctity of the new constitution and using it as a source of legitimacy, not deviate from its principles and adopting narrow interpretations to serve their own means as practice is now sadly indicating.

The Presidential Commission to Investigate Embezzlement is a perfect example of this government wavering from its democratic ideals, and heading down a very slippery slope. Firstly the commission is founded on very shaky and narrow legal justifications. Any half-wit interpretation of Article 115 of the constitution will corroborate that the broad powers granted to the commission are not actually justifiable under it.

The majority members of the commission sport yellow and are vehemently loyal to the president, which further goes to undermine the credibility of the commission and shows that its not transparent nor accountable to anyone but the government. It doesn’t serve the people justice, but is only self-serving for an MDP cause. What is perhaps most frightening is when asked why the commission was set up, the government argues, that it was necessary because the independent institutions are only fledgling and currently ineffective, and so far have not taken up any action with regard to the auditor general's reports. 

Just because independent institutions that have the sole mandate of investigating corruption in this country are not effective, is no reason to take to take the law unto yourselves, so to speak. Instead the government should be trying to lobby the independent institutions, financing them to make them more effective and trying to ensure that these independent institutions are strengthened. Otherwise, what is the point of having any independent institutions at all? Why not get rid of them all, and instead leave it up to the executive to execute so-called justice?

The constitution should never be disregarded when political decisions are made especially those related to policy decisions impacting on the people. The decentralisation process taking place is an obvious example of this. The process is mandated for under the constitution which outlines the administrative provinces in its annex, and even more unambiguously states that the process should take place once legislation providing for decentralisation has been passed. However, this government chose to ignore these fundamentals and carried on with the process appointing home ministers, creating new administrative regions not accorded for and all without the legitimacy of an Act. 

The intrinsic relevance, the protective role and the constructive importance of democracy can indeed be very extensive. Inadequacy of practice applies also to some failings in even the most mature of democracies and in a country like the Maldives that is only nascent in its consolidation of democracy, inadequacy of practice sets dangerous grounds for us to move backwards and not forwards.

The consensus which many supporters of reform and change in this country were seeking was a change from confrontation and the ‘top down’ approach to one of conciliation. Most importantly, a relationship of trust between politicians and voters and of good political decision-making in a democratic society.

Perhaps President Nasheed has forgotten that it should be the aspiration of this government that democracy and its ideals should be realised for all Maldivians and not just MDP. It was with that vested hope that the country elected him president, and it is without wonder that so many are now disillusioned with the practices of the government so far.

Of discontent and dissent

Despite all the rhetoric about how this government is a coalition, it seems that high-ranking members of the coalition who disagree with the president and the ruling party are now slowly but surely being shown the door. Or so disillusioned with the practices of the government they have resigned and left.

The practice of democracy in a coalition government, consensual politics implies that politicians, particularly those from different political parties, seek to reach agreement by accommodating each others’ differences. These ministers had to voice out their opinions, perhaps because professional advice they were giving was not listened to by the ruling party. They then became disgruntled and resorted to expressing their opinions to the media, to inform the public.

The first to go, Gasim Ibrahim, the home minister, only after 22 days in office in an unexpected move after police actions on the rioting resorts. Upon resigning from cabinet he expressed criticisms over the government’s privatisation plans. It’s not the biggest secret, that there are many in the MDP that mock Gasim’s political abilities and from the beginning did not show him the loyalty and respect he deserved, therefore conclusive that perhaps he felt marginalised in cabinet.

Next was Dr Hassan Saeed, elevated to the post of advisor to the president, resigned on the hundredth day of the government. Perhaps Saeed was not so wise to leak confidential advice he gave to the president to the media. However, suppose that it was the only choice he had because his advice had not been listened to? It must have been quite frustrating to give sound advice and not have it listened to, and MDP loyalists painting the picture that Saeed was a man still bitter about losing the presidential elections. 

If he was so bitter about losing in the first round of the presidential elections, why would he have rallied so much support for President Nasheed towards to second round? Hassan Saeed’s resignation only confirmed to the public, what they already knew. That he was only appointed to the post as a posturing of a democratic coalition, but the reality was that he too was sidelined and dismissed. 

Most recently, fervently the door was shown to Dhiyana Saeed as the attorney general, whose fault again was using the medium of the media to express her legal dissent compromising collective cabinet responsibility. However, her legal opinions stand with merit and clout among the populous. As the attorney general who has a responsibility to the people to uphold the constitution, it is without wonder she got frustrated when the president ignored her advice and asked instead to sideline legality to get things done. Upon her resignation Dhiyana spoke openly of how she felt criticised and blatantly ridiculed even in cabinet meetings and by members of the ruling MDP.

It is the duty of this government to ensure that the new constitution is executed well, and policy is implemented according to the rule of law. But instead, they dismiss the attorney general (assign Ali Hashim, party loyalist as the acting attorney general when there are several lawyers in Cabinet) and speak of downsizing the attorney general’s office (AGO), mandated under the constitution for upholding the rule of law. 

Perhaps it might be easier for MDP to rubberstamp their policies whilst flouting legality if there was no AGO, however it certainly sets a very dangerous precedent, and is the wrong way forward for fragile democracy with a frail judiciary. 

The only non-MDP ministers who are tolerated in cabinet so far is Dr Ali Sawad, minister of tourism, arts and culture; Dr Hassan Latheef, minister of human resources, youth and sports; and Dr Mustafa Luthfy, minister of education, seemingly docile personalities who have not said anything controversial and are so far behaving without ruffling any feathers.

Rumours have it that the Minister of Civil Aviation and Communication Dr Jameel will follow in Dhiyana’s footsteps as a result of his very vocal criticisms of the ruling party during the parliamentary election campaign. Next will come Dr Shaheed, although the attempts to vilify his reputation during the whole Kosovo fiasco, including presidential orders that the police investigate the allegations of corruption, proved unsuccessful.

It begs the question would the president have been so quick to investigate had it been cabinet members of his own party? Nonetheless Shaheed will probably stay as he not only survived but came out on top after attempts of tainting during the Kosovo allegations. He is also an invaluable asset to the government as foreign minister, respected by the international community and as one of the shrewdest politicians in this country it is better to keep him in cabinet rather that as a vocal opponent. 

At the end of the day when only around 20 per cent of the country voted for MDP, how democratic is a cabinet that is only reflective of a minority voice just because the president wants only people who he is not afraid of, who will not say ‘no’ to him. Loyalty and collective cabinet responsibility is certainly important, however, they say that the most solid relationships are built from friends who are not afraid to criticise you. Blind loyalty is certainly not what this government needs right now. 

Even during the parliamentary elections the MDP campaigned with a certain air of arrogance. They lost because they were so sure they were going to win. They talked about what hadn’t been achieved in the past thirty years of dictatorship instead of focusing on what was achieved in eight months of democracy. Instead of talking about moving the country forward instead of focusing on how the government was going to provide better healthcare or affordable housing they talked about how one of their first agenda’s to put before parliament would be how to bring the actions of the former regime to justice. An eye for an eye, as they say will only lead to blindness. 

As the numbers from the constituencies came in, state ministers (one of whom was even jailed overnight as a result of nuisance) led mass demonstrations outside the headquarters of the Elections Commission, yelled at the police, and blamed the media for what went wrong. They could not look beyond the arrogance that because they were the ruling party, defeat in the parliamentary elections was even a possibility. 

Even more telling are the actions of MDP loyalists and candidates who tried to sabotage other party candidates’ campaigns. Perhaps they forgot that they were no longer the grassroot activists yelling on the streets for change, or forgot that they were the ruling party and a government with a responsibility or to act with more decorum that is expected of them by the public. Especially after their display during the parliamentary elections, MDP can never again take any moral high ground when foul play is alleged, because instead of upholding the democratic process, they played a major role in trying to stifle and defy it. 

It seemed at times their demeanour during the parliamentary elections, carried an air of desperation, intimidation and a slight whiff of what the former dictatorial regime used to do, when they knew they were about to lose at something. The MDP now moves fashioning a set of very large blinkers.

The heartbeat of democracy

Perhaps President Nasheed needs to revisit the days leading up to the second round of the presidential elections, and remember the Grand Patriotic Coalition. That it was the effort of the leaders of all the parties that got him elected and for that he needs to do them due justice, and remember Wathan Edhey Gothah, as the people will. 

Perhaps what this government needs to understand is that conflict over public interest should be accepted and indeed welcomed as an inevitable part of a democratic society. In such a society political decision making must be based on the principle of genuine consultation, the need to engage in discussion among different points of view, and on pragmatic practice of reaching compromises amid conflicting goals and values.

If the ruling MDP continues to use its new power for self-serving means and ends, they are making a mockery of what democracy is along with everything that they and the people of this country have fought so hard for and avowed against. It is time that the MDP revisit their values and promises that they made to the people that elected them.

It can be argued that the MDP have ensured that in the Maldives ‘democracy’ now operates as part of the ideology of oppression by pretending falsely that it offers its citizens equality and freedom when it does not. Whereas for so many years this country’s effects have gone towards the hope that MDP will instill a radical transformation of society which will overthrow the structure of oppression and allow people to come to understand and meet their true needs. Convicted in the belief that no other form of regime offers perfect freedom and equality so much as a liberal democracy. 

If people’s trust for the government is waning only after six months after inauguration there are certainly bleaker days ahead for our tiny nation. Let us hope that Lord Acton’s aphorism (that absolute power corrupts absolutely) does not ring true once again for the Maldives.

It is certainly time to take the pulse of the nation, and to see whether the heartbeat of democracy in the Maldives, under the rule of the Maldivian Democratic Party, is still ticking.

Article by: Haseena Ibrahim. On www.minivannews.com

Monday, May 25, 2009

A small “Box Seller” receives global award for Quality? Must be the victim of a Scam

This is exactly what I feel when a PC reseller in Maldives wins awards almost 3 consecutive years for quality. There are so many, more qualified PC distributors and resellers across the globe. Like IngramMicro or CDW or TechData. But why on earth would a plaque be awarded to a firm in Maldives for selling PCs. If it was beaches, luxury travel or fishing I can understand.

So, about a year back I did some google searching for the credibility of this so called “BID” award for Quality and Blah Blah…. And here is what I found.

1.       Look up google for “business initiative directions” (that is what B.I.D stands for) and you find all sorts of web addresses under different domains listing the so called BID awards.To name a few

http://www.bid-paris.com/en/main.php

http://www.bid-org.com/menu.htm

http://worldquality.org/en/index.php

http://bid-planet.com/conbordes_archivos/index.htm

http://www.bid-quality.com/en/index.php

http://www.bid-qualitysummit.com/en/index.php

 

This is loads of more websites belonging to BID so they will get you the moment you type “Business Initiative Directions” on google.

 

2.       Now let’s look at the sponsors of BID awards and the magazines on which they publish about the awards

The Magazines:

http://www.hnova.com

http://www.brandazo.com

http://www.gperson.com/

http://www.centrexp.com/

http://www.neussner.com/

 

Don’t you find a little awkward that all these magazines publish only news feeds form other sources. They do not have any genuine content whatsoever. Ah… except for BID award news just to amuse you..

 

The Main Sponsor

http://www.imarpress.com

 

The website of Main Sponsor is worse. Look at that website, nothing but hyperlinks.

 

3.       Ok… now the people who pay huge sums of money, travel to Geneva and Paris and fetch these awards.

Do you guys know any company by the name Jorio Coca Cola Corse. You get the idea rigt? And if you look up google for the “Jorio Coca Cola Corse” you will only find this company only on the websites that I have highlighted at the top. Maybe the real name of Coca Cola Company is Jorio Coca Cola Corse. I don’t know! but these guys received the award.

 The second type of deceit is when they use a small branch of a huge company and award them. Here is one.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JkfePm4HoBQ&feature=channel_page

But that is Indian Oil (Mauritius) and they don’t make a big fuss out of it. They have not even mentioned about this particular award on their website.

http://www.ioml.mu/en/news/

 The third type: Who pay thousands of dollars each year to buy this award, well literally, and showcase it at their sales centre.

 http://www.megachiplive.com/company/news-events/president-congratulates-megachip-maldives

 And unfortunately one is a Board member of Dhiraagu and the other one is an Elected MP.

 http://www.megachiplive.com/

 I wrote to Megachip about a year ago explaining all what I have found out above but they never bothered. Go see the awards at Megachip showroom, Majeedi Magu

Cheers to all....