OSA Extends Deadline for Human Rights Day Photo and Poster Competition until 30th November

OSA is looking for striking photos and posters that reflect your thoughts about the cultural community in the Maldives. The topic is broad but that gives you more freedom. It might be a strong statement expressing your frustrations, showing how people are not able to participate in the community.

Alternatively, it could be a positive image about how you actively take up your right to participate in the cultural community, such as a picture of people playing drums in traditional dress, a group of friends skating or the bustling scene of the fish market.

OSA encourages you to be creative and express yourself. You only need a title for the entry and it must be submitted with your name, date of birth (entrants must be between 16 and 24 years) and contact details (phone and e-mail).

More good news is that from today we are extending the deadline until 30th November so you will have a little more time to compile your entry. Digital images should be sent to jesskateg@gmail.com and prints or posters to P.O. Box 3002.

GOOD LUCK!

OSA Human Rights Day Poster and Photo Competition

OSA invites you to take part in our Human Rights Day Photo and Poster Competition.

Theme: Your cultural life of the community in the Maldives

The theme of the OSA competition is 'the right freely to participate in the cultural life of the community' (Article 27 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, 1948). The idea is for you to think about your culture in the Maldives and how you enjoy this within your community. You might take photo of a family member in traditional Maldivian dress, draw a picture of your friends skating or paint an image of the bustling community at the fish market...

The Prize: A visit to see the United Nations human rights capital, Geneva, Switzerland and human rights related books and CDs

Top prize of this OSA competition is a trip to the UN capital for human rights Geneva, Switzerland! The winner will fly to Geneva where they will get the opportunity to have an educational tour of all of the spectacular UN sights, including the Palais des Nations, the International Centre for the Red Cross, the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights, and more. A chaperone to accompany the winner will also be invited to join the trip.

Runners up will be invited to attend the OSA Human Rights Day celebration on the 10th December and will be awarded with human rights themed books and CDs.

Entry deadline and specifications: Open to all 16 - 24 year olds in the Maldives, deadline 25th November 2007.

The competition is open to all 16-24 year olds in the Maldives. Entries should be submitted before the deadline of 25th November 2007.

Photos can be taken with a digital camera or phone. Developed photo prints should be standard size and posters A4 size and any materials can be used on the design.

All entries should be submitted with an application form which you can download from here. Digital images can be e-mailed to jesskateg@gmail.com and you can send prints and posters to Open Society Association, P.O. Box 3004.

If you have any questions or require further information please e-mail OSA Lead Coordinator Jessica Kate Griffiths jesskateg@gmail.com or call 7671487.

Should we encourage an English Literary Association?

This afternoon, I attended a gathering of poetry lovers at Salsa Royale organized by the well-known Dhivehi poet, Jadulla Jameel and his associates in the civil society. I arrived a little bit late because it took a lot longer than I realized to fully charge the battery of my video camera. The organizers and the participants had opted not to invite the media or the press formally, so I undertook to make a record of the event.

Jadulla is widely known in the Maldives. He is a poet in his own right and a fearless defender of free expression. He also hails from a very well known family, both for their literary achievements and political clout.

When I arrived, Jadulla was introducing the event. I was pleased to see that the event was well attended, especially by a lot of young people. Jessica from the Open Society Association was already there. I also noticed that Hon. Mujuthaba, former Minister of Trade and Chairperson of the Human Rights Commission, was also there.

Many of the younger faces were new to me. Some were people I had met before. But all seemed very eager and looked very happy to be there. Utopian Culture had a good presence.
Shihab read a poem, I think written by Jadulla. A topical poem that voiced some of the angst that fills the streets of Male’.

Jadulla himself read a poem, written by a young girl, a Thalassaemia patient. She had the wisdom of the sages and the flair of a poet. I had heard the poem before, and had found that a very moving poem. Jadulla’s reading of it carried the emotive undertones of the lines well.

Jadulla was followed by Mujuthaba, who read one of his own poems, a poem that he said he had written on 8 April 2006. It was a very topical poem, with sharp angles on the current political ferment, a real soul –searching poem by one of the key players in the current reform process.

Next, a young girl, I think she said her name was Kulshum, came up and read a poem that she had written. It spoke directly to the primary concerns of her generation, but also had broader interest. It was a poignant expression of the issues that exercise the conscience and the minds of all civic-minded people in the country. The elegance of her expression was matched by the fluency of her delivery, and conveyed the incisiveness of the poet’s mind. She should keep on writing—her meter, rhythm, diction and imagery all fused into mesmerizing poetry, written with uncommon flair.

Edith Piaf also made her entry to the event, via a disc recording. Not only was a song sung by her, but the song was turned into skit, with the words being read by Shazra, who had studied in France, and acted by Andhu. I don’t understand a word of French, but I love the singing of Edith Piaf and Charles Aznavour. I got to Aznavour not through French sources, but from Bob Dylan, who sang an Aznavour song at a concert of Dylan’s that I attended years ago at the Madison Square Garden. It was Aznavour who sang that one should “get up and leave without a word when love is no longer being served!”

I was pleased to find out that the gathering included a few students who were studying English literature. They clearly had enough passion for their subject to spend the afternoon at the poetry recital. I had a chance to talk to them and were very impressed by their interest in literature and their mature approach to the works that they were reading—Othello, Emma, Pride and Prejudice, Street Car Named Desire, etc. I was dismayed to learn that only 5 students were enrolled in the literature class! Twenty-seven years ago, I ploughed through Othello, Emma and so on, again with only 4 colleagues! A country that ignores history and literature cannot have a bright future! No wonder our young minds are falling prey to narrow-minded ideas!

I had gone to the event without any poems. But Nishwan, a young man taking an year off from his studies in London, came up there and recited a poem he said he had found that day, “Crook with the Crown”. He said he had looked through his own anthology of poetry and found that his poetry was all about Cupid, and so he had to get another poem with political overtones. He was kind enough not toe expose the author of that poem.

I felt obliged to own up to having written that, in August 2001. I had no idea what the date was because most of my poetry are written between 11:00 pm and 1:00 am or on an airplane with no sense of time, or in a hospital bed when I lose count of time. But Jessica had to hand a couple of my poems which I had passed on to her for comment earlier that day. I had left over 60 pages of poetry in the President’s Office which I forget to remove before I bolted out the door and haven’t been able to recover them yet.

I thought I would read a poem—Present Tense at the Museum, which I had written in August 2001. I must have been in a hospital or something, to have had time to write so many poems in August 2001!

I don’t know what the audience made of my poem. But it was about the political dystopia that I saw around me, in 2001. It was some ways a dated poem, because I referred to an “unchanging caste”. But I was expressing my disgust over the complacency with which the establishment was gloating about the achievements of the past and I was warning them that “the future will rebel at the past”! A museum displayed those who had enjoyed all sorts of perks in the past: “rows and rows of silent dignity, pointing to yesterday’s opportunity”.

At the break, with music from a couple guys from the band 1984, some of the brightest young people I met in a long time, Ibu, Affan and Nashia, took issue with my time in government. We had an engaging dialogue on the role and impact of New Maldives in government, but Jadulla reminded us that poetry should take precedence over politics. I thought the discussion had more to do with philosophy than politics, but either way, poetry had to rule.

It was a wrench to walk away from the trio – and I look forward to a chance to talk to them again. These are the people whose voices must be heard by the powers that be. I hope that the country doesn’t lose people like them, and indeed discovers more of them.

Which brings me to my original point: why not set up an English Literary Club? To be fair, the idea belongs to Mujuthaba, but it is one that I heartily endorse. Life imitates art as art imitates life. Reading a good book is like living a lifetime. It can open-up minds and widen horizons.

Discussions among literati can be very enlightening, and certainly contribute to a vibrant culture.

Prospects for Democratic Transition: Panel Discussion hosted by US Ambassador

The US-Maldives Friendship week had many items. The spriteliest moment came with the Rhythm Nation, when US dancers and musicians joined in the week-long celebrations for a high energy hip hop dance show. The grand finale was fusion music of Bodu Beru and Hip Hop. Perhaps there wasn’t a dull moment in the week. The Open Society is very pleased to have been associated with at least some of the items of the week.

The Panel Discussion on “Democratic Reform in the Maldives” clearly stole the limelight, in terms of media comment and controversy. The Open Society is thankful for the US Embassy for organizing the event because we believe that the realm of ideas and free expression in this country needs to be expanded. This kind of exercise does not require a foreign host, but when local actors are polarized and allergic to each other, a friend of democracy and of the Maldives, can play a very useful role.

In any case, democrats always welcome a chance to talk to each other.

On behalf of OSA, Shaheed attended, at the invitation of the US Ambassador. Government ministers were invited to participate in the Panel Discussion but somehow none of them showed up. Perhaps either the topic or the other panelists, which included the US Ambassador, were not worth ministerial time. Shaheed was told the day before by the US Embassy that Minister Nasheed would be representing the DRP/Government on the Panel.

Quite a large audience did turn up. Again, there did not seem to be any DRP members. There were a few officials from the Foreign Ministry, the Information Ministry, Elections Office and a good attendance by the free media and NGO community. Most of the audience comprised MDP, whose chairperson did have the courtesy to grace the event. The Human Rights Commissioner and some of his associates also found democracy worth talking about.

The first speaker was the US Ambassador who was both the host and the moderator of the event. He spoke about the importance the US attached to the democratic reform agenda and on the important benchmarks for democratization. He spoke about the importance of access to rule of law and access to information and resources. He stressed the critical role of free and fair elections and the need for the government to invite election monitors early.

The government/DRP was represented by Mr. Anil, the newly appointed Commissioner for Legal Reform. He said his brief was to discuss democracy from a technical perspective rather than from a political perspective, and gave an update on the work of the Special Majlis and what outcomes one might expect in terms of the new constitution. Anil was very upbeat about the new constitution and presented it as a first-rate constitution.

Shaheed spoke next and was followed by Mariya Didi, winner of US State Department’s Woman of Courage Award last year. Mariya spoke about the lack of space for dissent and the over-bearing nature of government, including the concentration of power in the executive. She also lamented the gulf between democratic values and principles and societal attitudes towards women and the opposition.

Shaheed began by saying that he had been earlier saying that he had been optimistic about prospects for democratic reform but implied that he may now have become more guarded in his optimism about the prospects for successful democratic transition. In actual fact, he listed what he thought were the conditions that favoured a democratic transition and the conditions that were militating against it. He also identified which model of democratic transition best resembled the Maldives situation. He said even the best constitution in the world could not, in itself, guarantee democracy, but required the support of independent institutions and democratic mindsets and values.

Shaheed referred to Professor Huntington’s seminal study on democratic transitions based on the Third Wave countries and said that that wave was continuing into the 21st century.

Shaheed said Huntington identified four key variables: a) failure of government and increasing doubt over the legitimacy of government; b) rising levels of education and wealth and increasing means of demanding civil rights; c) opposition of religious leaders towards the status quo; d) external pressure on human rights; e) demonstration effects.

In nearly all these areas, Shaheed found that developments favoured democratic transition although he questioned if the appetite of the US to promote democracy had not become dampened with the way the Iraqi venture had turned. (To which the US Ambassador assured the audience that the appetite had not waned because of Iraq). Shaheed referred to the Warsaw Declaration of 2000 by 107 states recognizing that democratic states had a collective responsibility to help others to become democratic. He also noted that in 2005, the UN had adopted as an international norm, the notion of Responsibility to Protect ( ie in the event of human rights abuses).

While Shaheed found that , in terms of these five factors, the conditions seemed to favour democratic transition in the Maldives, he noted that Huntington pointed out a sixth necessary element: that the elites must believe that democracy is something that is beneficial for the people. Here Shaheed queried whether in fact the faith of the elites in democracy was contingent or unreserved. He said that not enough was being done to promote public awareness on democracy and that, being a rather closed society, there was very little scope for alternative viewpoints. He lamented the fact that the governing elites did not believe that there could be healthy difference of views and referred to pro-government websites which promoted hatred and contempt towards dissenters and the political opposition.

Shaheed described a closed society as one in which there was no world of ideas different from the world of existing facts. Thus, it is because the Maldives is a closed society that people wondered if there was anyone other than the incumbent who was fit for office. He also said that the reflexive action of the elites to explain every discordant development as “no threat to the existing state of affairs” is another feature of a closed society, and pointed to the over-reaction in the state radio and tv to the announcement by Dr . Saeed to contest the presidency next year. The announcement was measured by existing facts and was ruled out as being of no consequence to next year’s election. Shaheed also noted that the Maldives was one of only four or five countries, along with China, Cuba, Myanmar and North Korea to argue at the Vienna Conference on Human Rights in 1993 that human rights were culturally-relative rather than universal.

However, as Shaheed said, elite faith in democracy would be a necessity only where democratic transition is to be led by government. He noted that there were several routes to democracy and that they were, again to use Huntington’s typology, a) transformation, where the transition is government-led, as was the case with India and Brazil; b) replacement, where the opposition elements succeeded in replacing the authoritarian order with democracy, as in former East Germany and Romania; c) transplacement, where the government and the opposition both moved the country towards democracy as happened in Poland and former Czechoslovakia; and d) foreign intervention, as in the case of Grenada and Panama.

Shaheed ruled out intervention as an option. He suggested that the other three models still were feasible, but if certain conditions were fulfilled. If the transformation model is to succeed, he said that President Gayoom should complete the reform agenda during the current term, including establishing the independent institutions that Hassan, Jameel and Shaheed wrote about in a letter to the President earlier this month, and not contest elections in 2008.

If the President were to contest elections, then a united front of pro-democracy forces would be able to achieve democratic transition by replacement. But if they were not united, they would fail, and if the pro-democracy forces suffered an electoral defeat next year, it would be impossible to attain a peaceful democratic transition by replacement in the foreseeable future.

Shaheed also said that the most stable democratic transitions occurred when there was transplacement ie where the governing elites and the opposition forces collaborated in attaining democratic transition. In all cases, a country is deemed to have been set firmly as a democracy when two peaceful transfers of power have occurred.

Shaheed said that what would definitely bring democracy would be if President Gayoom set his mind on joining the Club of Madrid rather than seek a further term. The Club was established in the year 2000 to bring together former Heads of States who had facilitated democratic transitions in their countries.

In the discussion that followed, Shaheed also called for a government of national unity as an interim arrangement to prepare a free and fair election.

Pathways to Democracy: Seven Ways to Speed Up the Reform Agenda

The following is a document submitted to the President yesterday, by Dr. Hassan Saeed, Dr. Ahmed Shaheed and Mohamed Jameel.

Summary

• Without implementing the reforms listed below, the elections to be held in 2008 cannot be free, fair or inclusive or enable the people of Maldives to choose a leader for the future. If the promise of a liberal democratic Maldives is not to be a fairy tale, then the following pathways must be pursued now to attain democracy
1) Strengthen the independence of the judiciary:
a. Divest the Chief Justice of non-judicial functions
b. Follow emerging practice and appoint a Chief Justice with the advice and consent of the parliament
c. Increase transparency and public confidence in the highest court of appeal by holding public hearings as pledged by the President on 11 November 2005
2) Undertake urgent reform of the Criminal Justice System by revising current administrative guidelines to incorporate standards which are contained in proposed reform legislation and are consistent with human rights obligations
3) Reconstitute the Police Integrity Commission to make it an effective watchdog
4) Entrench media freedom by establishing the right to information
5) Strengthen anti-corruption measures immediately:
a) Free prosecution decisions from executive approval
b) Honour commitments under the UN anti-corruption convention
c) Require that public office-bearers declare their assets and interests
6) Implement the Civil Service Act without further delay and dismantle the patronage system as required under the Act
7) Strengthen the independence of the Elections Commissioner and invite international monitors now

____________

How to deliver democracy before it is too late for Maldives

Three years since the government promised liberal democracy, Maldives continues to resemble a police state more than a democracy. Whilst international pressure has produced some reforms, the people of Maldives continue to live in fear and without the most fundamental safeguards against arbitrary government. Frustration over the slow pace of reforms has seen the resignation of key reformist ministers from the Cabinet recently. Corruption has become rampant as national assets are being auctioned off to raise revenue for a bloated re-election budget. Lawlessness and religious extremism are growing unchecked as law enforcement resources target opposition political activities rather than crime. The Government must accelerate the implementation of the reform agenda if Maldives is to see long-term stability, peace and prosperity, instead of insinuating that democracy and human rights protection beget religious extremism and instability. Without implementing the reforms listed below, the elections to be held in 2008 cannot be free, fair or inclusive or enable the people of Maldives to choose a leader for the future who can save the country from creeping extremism and rampant corruption and strengthen democracy.

In June 2004, President Gayoom promised to make Maldives a liberal democracy, and promised to establish an independent judiciary, implement a two-term limitation on the office of the presidency, remove his control over the parliament and the elections commissioner, strengthen government accountability and human rights protection, and allow multiparty elections. These measures were outlined as a 31-point proposal to revise the Constitution, a task to be completed by the end of 2005. Having missed that deadline without any meaningful progress in writing a new Constitution, in March 2006, in response to strident criticism that the government was not serious about implementing the proposed reforms, the President announced a detailed Roadmap which provided time-frames for the implementation of the reform programme.
The Reform Agenda, as detailed in the Roadmap, included the 31-point proposals announced by the President in June 2004, the 5-Year Criminal Justice Action Plan published in 2004 by the Attorney-General, specific commitments to embrace international norms and practices in human rights protection and anti-corruption measures advocated by the Foreign Office, and actions designed to promote civil society and civic education. In addition to revising the Constitution, the Roadmap also identified primary legislation and executive actions to ensure that legal, administrative and political frameworks were in place to ensure that the elections in 2008 would be free, fair and democratic.
18 months on, the Reform Agenda has failed to deliver crucial reforms that could lay the groundwork for the litmus test of making the elections free, fair and inclusive. Public confidence in the sincerity of the government’s commitment to the Reform Agenda has been dealt a severe blow by the President’s announcement that he would run for a 7th consecutive term as president in the elections due in 2008, despite having voluntarily offered a two-term limitation in his 31-point proposal. His claim that he requires more time to complete the Reform Agenda is at best an admission of the failure of the Roadmap and at worst an outright rejection of the Roadmap. The government and the ruling party are either heedless or unaware of the potential for instability and chaos that reneging on the promises for reform could create for Maldives. Failure to resuscitate the Reform Agenda and honour the pledges made by the President in 2004, can only increase distrust, polarization and instability in the community and lead to a showdown between the forces of reform and those of reaction.
The results of the public referendum held on 18 August 2007, to choose between a presidential or Westminster-style government, are being misconstrued as an endorsement of the present government. Far from it, the people voted for change—for the separation of powers and term limitation on the presidency, demands which have been consistently made for a number of years. Needless to say, public frustration is running high, especially as the government has shown no sign of abiding by the Roadmap.
The Failure of the Roadmap
The Roadmap pledged the implementation of reforms on three tracks. These were reforms to be effected by the People’s Special Majlis (Constitutional Assembly), the People’s Majlis (Parliament), and the Executive.
• The Constitution was to be completed by 31 May 2007, but the date lapsed without a single chapter being completed. Even where the Assembly has voted for clear departures from current practices, the government has either ignored them or acted contrary to those measures. While the government is technically not bound to implement these decisions until they are passed in the form of a Constitution, the government can demonstrate good faith by acting in accordance with the spirit of the decisions reached by the Assembly.

• While the Roadmap proposed 22 separate pieces of legislation, only three have been passed. These are namely the Audit Bill, the Civil Service Bill and the Bill Amending the Human Rights Act. Even in these cases, the Audit Act has not been implemented.

• The government pledged in the Roadmap to carry out a number of executive actions to advance reform, but little has been done. These promises include accession to international human rights instruments, implementation of civic education programmes, proclamation of a regulatory framework on public assembly, formation of a Police Integrity Commission, establishment of a supreme court and an ombudsman’s office, and holding local elections. While human rights instruments have been acceded to, they are not being implemented; the regulation on public assembly falls short of the international norm; and the Police Integrity Commission is a lapdog rather than a watchdog of the Home Minister. But nothing is more worrying than the failure to strengthen the independence of the judiciary.

Is there a commitment to reform?
The sense of frustration of pro-democracy elements is reinforced by their perception that the government has deliberately sought to delay and derail the Reform Agenda. They point out to a number of actions that demonstrate lack of good faith.
• It was the government who pulled out of the Westminster House process in October 2006 by refusing to nominate its contact group to sit down with MDP to speed up the Reform Agenda.

• It was the DRP who pulled out of the talks with MDP in February 2007 when a plan had been agreed with MDP to form a three member Panel, including the constitutional expert deputed by the UN, to draw up a mutually agreeable text of the Constitution.

• The Police Integrity Commission was handpicked by the Police Commissioner and was deliberately made a toothless body, which was still-born.

• The regulation on public assembly, which does not meet the international norm on the right to peaceful assembly, was issued without the concurrence of the Attorney-General and therefore unconstitutionally intruded on the rights of citizens.

• The decision by the Cabinet in 2005 to make the Judiciary independent was not implemented by the President. There is no judicial independence and the government has virtually ignored the recommendations of UN Special Rapporteur on the Independence of Lawyers and Judges.

• The pledge made by the government to provide, by April 2007, a legal framework to ensure right to information has not been honoured.

• Although the government has acceded to the UN Convention against Corruption, it has not honoured a pledge to table a bill to strengthen anti-corruption measures.

• The announcement by the President that he would contest elections in 2008 reneges his pledge on two-term limitation for the presidency. President Gayoom’s candidature makes it doubly imperative that the Reform Agenda must be speeded up, rather than frozen, pending the completion of the work on the new Constitution. Democracy is not a document, but a set of ideas and values and the government must demonstrate its commitment to democratic ideals.

Reviving the Reform Agenda: Pathways to Democracy
With the intention of reviving the reform agenda and ensuring that the multiparty democracy is made a reality in 2008, we propose that the President undertake the actions outlined below in 7 key areas.
1) Strengthen the independence of the judiciary

The Roadmap pledged the creation of a Supreme Court by August 2007 and to institute other measures to enhance the independence of the judiciary. The actions of the government over the past 18 months have ignored these promises. It is imperative that the people of the country have recourse to a judge who is not answerable to the executive.

a) Divest the Chief Justice of non-judicial functions
The current Chief Justice, in addition to being a presidential appointee, also holds a post in the executive branch, namely, President of the Supreme Council on Islamic Affairs. This dual role must come to an end. The Attorney General had, in January 2007, publicly called for the divestment of the non-judicial functions of the current Chief Justice.
b) Follow emerging practice and appoint a Chief Justice with the advice and consent of the parliament
In the referendum of 18 August 2007, the people have resoundingly endorsed the principle of separation of powers. The Constitutional Assembly has already resolved that under the new constitution the Chief Justice would be hired and fired by the President on the advice of the Parliament. Also Parliament has recently set up precedents for the appointment and dismissal of head of independent institutions with the advice and consent of the parliament—namely, the Auditor General (Audit Act 2007), members of the Civil Service Commission (Civil Service Act 2007), members of the Human Rights Commission (Human Rights Act 2006), and Governor and Deputy Governor of Maldives Monetary Authority (Maldives Monetary Authority (Amendment) Act 2007). Therefore, without waiting for any specific law to come into force, the President should demonstrate good faith and enhance the independence of the judiciary by appointing a Chief Justice with the advice and consent of the parliament. It is an anomaly that the judiciary not enjoy the independence enjoyed by lesser institutions.
c) Increase transparency and public confidence in the highest court of appeal by holding public hearings as pledged by the President on 11 November 2005
Currently the proceedings of the highest judicial body in the country, i.e. the Council which advises the President on judicial matters, take place behind closed-doors. Lawyers are not allowed to appear and argue before the Council. Its judgments are based on written submissions only. Further its judgments are not accessible to litigants, lawyers or the public. On 11 November 2005 President Gayoom, announced that proceedings of the Council would be made public in order to enhance transparency of the judiciary. However, to date no action has been taken despite repeated demands by the Attorney General.

2) Undertake urgent reform of the Criminal Justice System by revising current administrative guidelines to incorporate standards which are contained in proposed reform legislation and are consistent with human rights obligations
As part of the government’s effort to overhaul country’s criminal justice system, the government has, among others, submitted the following Bills to the Parliament.
• Criminal Procedure Code (Presented to the Parliament)
• National Security Service Bill (Presented to the Parliament)
• Police Bill (Presented to the Parliament)
• Prison and Parole Bill. (The government continues to hold back this Bill despite repeated requests by the Attorney General to present it to parliament).
Without waiting for the Parliament to pass these Bills, the government could issue Presidential Decrees incorporating these Bills. Even at the present, these areas are governed by administrative regulations and guidelines. Therefore, there is no reason why the government cannot issue Presidential Decrees to revise those guidelines to reflect the practices proposed in the new legislation and honour commitments made by the government under international human rights treaties.


3) Reconstitute the Police Integrity Commission to make it an effective watchdog

The Government failed to establish an independent Police Integrity Commission, in accordance with the Roadmap. According to the Roadmap the Commission was to be established on 31 August 2006. As part of the Westminster House negotiations, the government and MDP agreed that members of the Commission must be agreeable to both sides. This was not honoured by the Government. Members of the Commission (yet to be established fully) were handpicked by the Commissioner of Police Mr. Adam Zahir himself which was a mockery of the Roadmap’s letter and spirit as the very objective of the Commission was to check abuse of power by the Police Commissioner himself.

4) Entrench media freedom by establishing the right to information
In the past three years the country has experienced unprecedented level of freedom of expression and press. The reasons for this new found freedom are: refusal of the Attorney General to prosecute under the current penal code and other related laws; liberal policies adopted by the Ministry of Information, Arts and Culture; and international pressure exerted through the Foreign Ministry. However, there has been no change made to any law or regulation which had previously suppressed media freedom. Therefore, the new found media freedom could easily be compromised with a simple change in prosecution policies or changes within the Ministry of Information. To strengthen this fundamental right further, the government has submitted the followings Bills to the Parliament.
• Media Freedom Bill
• Freedom of Information Bill
• Registration of Newspapers and Magazines Bill
• Broadcasting Bill
• Cable Television Service Provision Bill
Judging from the current slow pace of the Parliament it might take several months, if not years, to pass these laws. Therefore, without waiting for the Parliament, the government could promulgate these Bills in the form of Presidential Decrees. In fact, in January 2007, the government promised the proclamation of a decree establishing the right to information when it introduced anti-defamation provisions. Such a decree has been awaiting Presidential authorization since April.

5) Strengthen anti-corruption measures immediately

a) Free prosecution decisions from executive approval

Current practice of the Anti-corruption Board (ACB) is to submit its investigative findings to the President’s office. Only after approval from the President’s Office can cases be referred to the Attorney General’s Office for prosecution. The government should discontinue this practice immediately.

b) Honour commitments made under the UN anti-corruption convention

The Constitutional Assembly has resolved that the ACB would be a fully autonomous body under the new Constitution. The government has also acceded to the UN anti-corruption convention. Therefore, the government should take steps to ensure the ACB is a fully autonomous body. This would include revision of the procedure for the appointment of the Board members, and provision of job security, for instance.

c) Require that public office-bearers declare their assets and interests

Corruption seems to be most rampant at higher levels of government. Therefore, the government should require the President, ministers, deputy ministers, and other political office bearers to declare their assets and interests.

6) Implement the Civil Service Act without further delay and dismantle the patronage system as required under the Act

The government continues to give unjustified promotion to civil servants who are supporters, activists of the governing DRP while denying even justified promotions to those who are sympathetic to the Opposition or those who failed to support the DRP. The Government should immediately discontinue this practice. Also the government should stop dragging civil servants into politics. Further the government should expedite the establishment of Civil Service Commission and enforce the Civil Service Law in its entirety well before the next elections.

7) Strengthen the independence of the Elections Commissioner and invite international monitors now

In addition to making the Elections Commissioner independent, the government must also implement the recommendations made by the Commonwealth Election Observer team of 2005 and of the Assessment Team of 2007. In order to ensure that there will be credible international observers to the next election, the government must invite the Electoral Affairs Division of the UN Department of Political Affairs to send their assessment mission to Maldives.

______________