The Total Revenue figure estimated by the government for 2009 is 9.5 billion mrf. That is the total. And this total includes what the government terms as Capital Revenue of 3.8 billion mrf. Capital revenue being an euphemism, a fancy term for the sale of those supposedly non-existent assets which Maumoon did not create in his thirty year rule. The mid-term budget 2009-2011 proposes to generate 5.7 billion rufiyaa by sale of capital assets not created in the last thirty years. As Yaameen said in one his speeches, those who do not know how to run businesses make money out of selling the capital assets created by those who did.

But we divert. If we deduct the 3.8 billion mrf. to be generated from the whole-sale liquidation of the wealth not created in the last thirty years; something that looks increasingly unlikely to be approved by the current parliament, the government’s revenue figure for 2009 is 5.6 billion mrf.

Let us at this juncture, ignore the fact that expenditure is rising faster than budgeted and revenue is falling faster, and assume that the budget figures are realistic. Let us, for the sake of argument accept that 5.6 billion mrf of revenue is going to be collected.

Now let us take a look at the expenditure side. Expenditure figures of the same budget shows that recurrent expenditure alone for the year is 8.6 billion mrf. Yes, that is 3 billion mrf more than what is going to earned domestically.

What is the 8.6 billiion made up of? That’s 4.1 billion of personal emoluments made up of salaries, wages, over times and other allowances. Another 351.9 million of pensions, retirement s and other benefits taking the expenses figure up to 4.4 billion mrf. Wait, we do not, yet have the operational budget necessary to run the government ministries. The rent, telephones, hire charges and the like. That’s 998.8 million mrf. That’s already 5.4 billion mrf. We have not yet, considered 206 million of travel expenses, 154.5 of supplies and requisitions and 328.8 million of training expenses. Knowing how prudent and cost conscious the government is, we can rightly assume that there will be, as the president and vice president are showing by personal example, no unnecessary travel related expenses. So being, the fair and balanced people we are, let’s ignore the travel expenses but bring in the 328.8 million of training expenses. Wait, that’s 5.7 billion. That’s more than the 5.6 billion that is estimated to be earned.

Still, the supplies and requisitions, and repairs and maintenance figures are to be included. In fact, the government’s own estimate of expenditure is 8.6 billion mrf. The revenue estimate of 5.6 added together with an estimated grant figure of 567 million mrf (which is yet to be granted) adds up to only 6.2 billion mrf, still 2.4 billion mrf shy of the estimated mrf.

That’s a hole of 2.4 billion mrf unless, we agree to sell off our hard earned assets to finance the daft and dim witted mdp government and keep them in power so that they can dig even a bigger hole for the next year.

Remember we are talking of estimates made in the budget assuming that anticipated revenue will be received, expenditure is controlled and unnecessary expenses curtailed. And we all know how that one is going.

When rebuked by the IMF in no uncertain terms, the President has reacted in a predictable manner. According the press secretary; the person who actually translates to common language such that the ordinary folk can get what the President actually said, (thereby giving significance to the local term ‘rasmee tharujamaanu’) the plan is to cut the ranks of the civil service.

Assuming a 15,000 mrf salary figure (an estimated average figure) per civil servant per month totaling to 180,000 mrf per year, the government will have to axe close to 13,000 staff just to fill the 2.4 billion shaped gap in the budget.

And yet that’s not all. There is still 3.9 billion mrf to be spent on capital expenditure. Yes, that’s 3.9 billion out of which 432 million mrf are allocated to development projects. That’s 432 million mrf of harbors that’s not going to be built, schools that’s not going to be teaching any time soon and mosques that’s not going to be open for prayers.

Now for some questions. Not wild conjecture. Just questions.

Will our civil service be paid towards the end of the year and if so how much money are going to be printed and what will be the effect on that on the already straining exchange rate? Secondly how is this position being further impaired by slashing another 500 million mrf from import duty? Ultimately who pays? What the hell are all those MP’s in the parliament doing? Who cares?

It is still surprising how so many people can still be made to believe in something if enough people go around shouting about it.

A case in point is this piece of legislation about revisions to Law No. 31/79, Import Export Law of Maldives. Submitted purely in order to prevent and delay the passage of bills submitted by Nasheed to protect, in his words, ‘the service chiefs’ (chief of defence and commissioner of police) and the other more ominous bills due to enter the parliament floor soon.

This is a bill that was tabled, debated, argued upon and sent to the relevant committee, where members spent countless hours amending the bill. The committee version of the bill was even finalized and signed and sent to the full majlis. In keeping with the practice of the majlis, the speaker of the new 17th majlis, sent the bill, WITH the committee amendments and their report back the government. However, in its haste to totally prevent, or at least to delay the debate on the bills relating to the protection of the services chiefs and other issues that may be tabled, MDP hastened to re-submit the bill and (surprise, surprise) completely forgotten to include the amendments proposed by the majlis committee. This has confounded so many people, that even MDP’s own MP (Aslam from North Hithadhoo) was complaining about the foolishness in tabling the bill again in its original form without incorporating the revisions and amendments prepared by the majlis committee after so many hours of consultation and debate.

But that only means that some of MDP own has also been kept in the dark about the actual reason why the bill has been submitted, re-submitted, viz. to delay the debate of more contentious issues until the witch hunt commission can put some opposition members behind bars or finally succeed in intimidating them.

There can simply be no other reason. The bill simply does not make any economic sense. No first year economic student in any university would submit such a foolish, irreverent, impudent and irrelevant piece of tomfoolery in the name of economics and good governance.

The objective of the bills is supposed to be, supposed being the operational word here, the attempt to make life more affordable. If that is the case, the bill should be thrown out and the government should be reprimanded for wasting the precious time of the majlis.

Let’s take a pause. How do you make life and living more affordable? If the objective is short term, the solutions are many. Increase Salary. Reduce Prices by abolishing import duty. Prohibit price hikes. Ban Inflation. Oh Yes, increase the value of the currency by lowering the exchange rate by legislation or regulation.

Yeah. Those are the solutions. And they will work, if the objective is short term. Those solutions only work in the short term. Repeat only in the short term. In the long term they will be counter-productive. And the long term refers not to one or more years. Here the long term can be as short as 4-6 months.

The real and only way to make life more affordable is to improve the economy. Increase GDP growth. Get the economy moving. There are no other sustainable solutions. If measures to re-energize the slowing economy is not introduced, and bloody quickly too, the economy is due to come to a grinding halt. Dollars will become more scarce as the reductions in tourist arrivals will really start to bite. Negative effects will be further exacerbated as fishery industry continues its decline and the construction industry grinds to a halt.

Quick and immediate solutions to these problems are the ones that will keep the economy alive. Measures and mature steps to counter those issues are what we need to address now.

However, what is being proposed is a bill to reduce import duty as if that would reduce of the cost of living. It would not. Not even in the short term. Snake Oil and Dragons Claw would work better.

However, campaign promises have to be kept. Superficial, insincere and in the end counterproductive moves designed to show to some people that MDP government is trying to make life more affordable has to be undertaken. The drama has to go on.

Meanwhile the majlis has got caught in the drama. Two and more days of full majlis debates have already been lost- needlessly. More hours will be lost in committee time. The bill would surely pass, as no member has the courage to speak against the utter waste and futility of this bill. They all have to make the grand gesture.

The bill would pass. Government revenue that is already in decline (even while expenditure increases) would decline further. Without effort to revive the economy the currency would further loose its value. And so on and so forth.

Shakespeare or some equally brainy chap once said that, ‘all the world’s a stage, and all the men and women, merely players for the grand drama that mdp is playing’. Or maybe I got that wrong.

Citizens of the country. Bend over. You are about to have a warm and intimate feeling in a region where the sun don’t normally shine.

Maldives President Mohamed Nasheed today made the much awaited nominations to Parliament for the Elections Commission, Anti-Corruption Commission and Prosecutor General. The nominees primarily comprise of members of President Nasheed’s Maldivian Democratic Party, Opposition Leader Maumoon Abdul Gayoom’s Dhivehi Raiyyithunge Party and its coalition partner, People’s Alliance.

The names proposed for the Elections Commission are Sheikh Hussain Rasheed Yoosuf (MDP); Ogaru Ibrahim Waheed (formerly MDP, now posing as Independent); Mohamed Ibrahim (formerly DRP, now MDP); Fuad Thaufeeq (formerly MDP, now PA) and Mauroof Ahmed (PA).

Sheikh Rasheed is the son of Baa Thulhaadhoo MDP leader and Counselor for Baa Atoll, Yoosuf Moosa. Ogaru Waheed was previously head of the Department of Inland Revenue in the Gayoom administration. Mohamed Ibrahim headed two state companies before becoming Deputy Minister of Construction and Infrastructure in the Gayoom Administration. He then moved to the interim EC, chairing the interim EC throughout its period. Fuad Thowfeeq was a key member of MDP’s policy review committees before joining PA and moving onto the interim EC. Mauroof Ahmed headed the Labour Section for several years before becoming Deputy Minister of Home Affairs after the DRP/PA coalition agreement was signed in the pre-presidential election period.

The nominees for the Anti Corruption Commission are Hassan Luthfee (S. Hithadhoo Ranfas), Abdulla Hilmy (GDh. Thinadhoo Halaveli), Khadeeja Rasheed (S. Hulhudhoo Violet Fehi), Mohamed Shareef (G. Winter House), Mohamed Waheed (G. Iheli, Male’ Dhafthar). The names proposed for the Anti-Corruption Commission do not show much public service experience, nor the prominent party leanings shown by the nominees for the EC. However, there is a definite predominance of the southern atolls in the line-up. What is also clear is that none of these nominees demonstrate any experience as befits the important post of a member of the Anti Corruption Commission. While Luthfee and Hilmy are members of the interim Anti Corruption Commission, little can be said commending their work in an interim commission that has repeatedly shown extreme partiality towards the Nasheed Administration.


In addition, President Nasheed has proposed current Prosecutor General Ahmed Muiz to retain the post of Prosecutor General.

The nominees for the EC, ACC and PG are reported to have been selected from about 130 applicants to the President’s Office. The applications were in response to an announcement by the President’s Office in early June calling for applicants to these posts. In a country which boasts over 8% of its population as educated above Masters’ Degree level, it is surprising to see the quality of President Nasheed’s nominations. It is also noteworthy that, in addition to marginalizing the nation’s educated, President Nasheed has also totally rejected the country’s professional, civil and political experience.

While the nomination of Nasheed’s family members and cronies, his party’s financiers, and MDP demonstration leaders to his administration’s key political posts are justified by his Press Secretary Mohamed Zuhair as multi-party democracy in action, such extreme partiality as shown in the above nominations cannot be justified in relation to independent commissions and offices. The function of such constitutionally independent institutions is to represent civil society without any partiality and to act as guardian of citizen rights by balancing the powers of the Executive, Legislature and Judiciary. It is a blatant violation of the fundamental tenets of democracy when the powers of the state attempt to co-opt and hijack independent commissions and independent offices.

A case in point is Ahmed Muiz, the current Prosecutor General. Until his appointment as PG, Muiz ran a long standing law firm with partner Husnu Sood, the current Attorney General. Both are President Nasheed’s classmates and followers. Both have nominally divested themselves of shares in the firm Muiz Sood and Co. by transferring these to proxies.

The fact remains that within the short period in which they have held corresponding offices of state, collusion between Muiz and Sood have robbed the Maldivians citizens of their right to justice. This is highlighted by the recent incident where Muiz has refused to press criminal charges against Sood who willfully presented false documents to the High Court. These are crimes under Sections 62, 66 and 67 of the Maldives Penal Code. By not charging Sood, Muiz is guilty under Section 76 of the Penal Code of aiding and abetting a criminal to evade justice. Both Muiz and Sood are hence also liable under Section 80 of the Penal Code for misfeasance in public office by abetting a criminal to escape due punishment. The Parliament should by rights hold Muiz accountable for repeatedly neglecting his legal duties in order to protect his cronies. In the light of these facts, by nominating Muiz for the post of PG, President Nasheed is spitting in the face of democracy.

Another case in point is the nomination of Mohamed Ibrahim for the Elections Commission. The recent High Court decision invalidating the May 9th parliamentary vote on Thaa Thimarafushi is clear evidence that Mohamed Ibrahim, as Commissioner of Elections, is culpable of gross negligence of duty and of acting in collusion with the MDP. In the Thimarafushi High Court case, the EC had testified in court that the vote on Thimarafushi as free and fair, and held in accordance with law. Yet, in the light of compelling eveidence, on June 11th the High Court ruled that the Thimarafushi vote was held in the midst of blatant violations of elections law and other laws of the country. It ordered the EC to hold a fresh vote in 30 days of the order. With such a clear court ruling compromising the independence and integrity of the EC, Mohamed Ibrahim should have resigned on his own, in accordance with internationally accepted norms. Instead he chose to apply to retain his post. This nomination too shows President Nasheed’s total and utter disrespect for the tenets of modern democracy. Mohamed Ibrahim is a relative of President Nasheed’s best friend and cousin by marriage, Ibrahim Mohamed Solih (MP for Lhaviyani Hinnavaru).

The same can be said for the inclusion amongst the nominees of leading members of opposition parties, the DRP and PA. Both parties in coalition hold 46% of parliamentary seats. The inclusion of senior opposition members amongst today’s nominations clearly points to a political tradeoff between President Nasheed and the opposition coalition. With President Nasheed on the war path hunting for alleged corruption cases against the leaders of DRP and PA, there is indeed basis for trade-offs between the two sides. Sadly, the casualties of this political trade-off are again the Maldivian people. As shown by these nominations, Maldivians can only dream of independent commissions or independent offices to represent their interests.

Maakun Falah, MDP candidate for Maafannu Dhekunu Constituency, had lodged a case against the EC, demanding that the May 9th parliamentary vote in his constituency be declared void, and a fresh vote be ordered. In the High Court hearing on the case, Falah’s attorney Husnu Sood claimed that the official report of elections officials on the day’s proceedings contained false information. Sood also deposited as evidence of this charge, a copy of what he claimed was the said official report. The High Court found that the document deposited by Sood was a fake. Judge Ali Hameed ruled that Sood’s fake document contained obvious and substantial differences from the original official report of the Elections Commission. It threw the case out of court since Sood had not presented any supporting evidence to justify the charge.

With the High Court ruling that the document submitted by Sood had been doctored, both Sood and his client Maakun Falah have committed crimes under Sections 62, 66 and 67 of the Maldives Penal Code, that is, the crime of willfully presenting false evidence. Section 62 defines the meaning of presenting false evidence under the Penal Code. Section 66 defines the submission of any false certificate or document to a court or legal venue of justice as also presenting false evidence. It prescribes a penalty for the crime as either two years in jail or exile, or a fine of not more than 1,000 Maldivian Rufiyaa. Section 67 deals with willful submission of false certification or documentation. This section defines the submission of a certificate or document to court without verifying its truth as willful presentation of false evidence. Hence, both Sood and Falah have committed crimes under each one of these three sections.

Sources report that Prosecutor General Ahmed Muiz has privately warned Husnu Sood that he stands on the brink of being sentenced for contempt of court should the courts so choose to move against him. It is disturbing that PG Muiz has limited himself to a mere private warning. The PG is in actual fact required by law to charge Sood for willfully presenting false evidence, under Sections 62, 66, and 67 of the Penal Code.

By not charging Sood, PG Muiz himself is guilty of aiding and abetting a criminal to evade justice under Section 76 of the Penal Code. Strictly speaking, in the light of their above actions in relation to this case, both Muiz and Sood are liable under Section 80 of the Penal Code for misfeasance in public office by abetting a criminal to escape due punishment. Section 79 states that aiding and abetting a perpetrator of a crime to avoid penalty for the crime is a crime in itself. The only exceptions provided under this section are aiding parents, children and or spouse. PG Muiz is Husnu Sood’s partner in their joint law firm Sood Muiz and Co. PG Muiz and Husnu Sood are both classmates and close cronies of President Mohamed Nasheed.

Last year, PG Muiz has also refrained from pursuing criminal charges against the then President-elect Mohamed Nasheed in the case where Nasheed had violated elections law by campaigning in the voting area while voting was ongoing. In that instance, PG Muiz withdrew the criminal charges against Nasheed.

Unverified sources report that the Falah case lodged by President Nasheed’s party MDP in order for it to create an excuse for public disorder and to intimidate the Judiciary. This was in anticipation of the court ruling in favor of DRP candidate Ghassan Maumoon in his case against the EC. Maakun Falah, infamous for his street gang and criminal activities, is a high profile organizer and gang leader of MDP street riots and intimidation activities targeting political opponents.

Weeks prior to Maakun Falah lodging his case, Ghassan Maumoon, the DRP candidate for Thaa Thimarafushi, had appealed to the High Court to invalidate the May 9th parliamentary vote in his constituency and order a fresh vote. It is reported that, in the even that Ghassan won his case, MDP had planned demonstrations outside the High Court to demand the same ruling for Maakun Falah. The similarity of the High Court appeal in both the Maakun Falah case and Ghassan Maumoon case lends credibility to these reports. However, in contrast to the Maakun Falah case which was pinned on the doctored document, compelling evidence was provided by Ghassan Maumoon to justify his claim that voting in his constituency had proceeded under fear and intimidation, and in violation of election laws and regulations. The High Court on June 11th ruled in his favour and ordered the EC to hold a fresh vote within 30 days of the court order. Following the dismissal of Maakun Falah’s case by the High Court, the MDP did try and organize riots outside the High Court, notably on days of court hearings in the Ghassan Maumoon case. However, these did not get much support.

Husnu Sood has also been indirectly warned of possible contempt of court charges because of his attempts to influence the Judiciary immediately after taking office as Attorney General. In Sood’s first public interview as Attorney General, he accused the Judiciary of purposefully delaying cases and thereby being negligent of its duty to deliver justice. Speaking volubly about the “long arm of the law”, Sood said in a press conference that the Herethere case had been delayed by the Judiciary without any adequate reason, resulting in the loss of rights and justice by several parties. He had promised to ensure that the Judiciary made a ruling on the case soon.

The very next day (June 4th), the Civil Court issued a public statement, warning that it would take action against any person interfering in the jurisdiction of the court. It appealed to all Maldivians to respect the Judiciary, stating that “Every individual should work to diligently discharge his/her responsibilities within his/her mandate, and should see this as the correct course of action, and should, out of respect, not willfully do anything that may diminish the standing of the Judiciary”.

This battle between the courts and Attorney General Sood continued last week, when the state television station Television Maldives broadcast a heavily biased program that repeated the Attorney General’s accusations of the Judiciary. The program “Q & A with Migdhaadh” was broadcast on June 9th. In addition to lambasting the Judiciary, it posed a Yes or No phone-in statement for viewer response. The statement, “Herethere case has been delayed because the Judiciary is drooping in its work”, was a repeat of Sood’s press statement on this issue. In reprisal, on June 10th, the Criminal Court ordered the Maldives Police Service to investigate the broadcast in order to determine whether the program had been broadcast with malicious intent to expressly create public mistrust of the Judiciary. The following day, the TVM repeated this program in defiance of the Court Order. It is not known how far the police have carried out its investigation.

Sood, a former judge, has been dogged by corruption charges since his days as a State Attorney. The most notable report is of a case in which he made a ruling in favor of Ibrahim Waheed of Medhuziyaaraiydhoshuge in return for him signing over half of his property to Sood’s wife.

With Prosecutor General Muiz continue to show his extreme partiality to his cronies and his former party the MDP, and acting in collusion with his partner Husnu Sood, the rights of Maldivians to justice and to equality before the law are likely to be just dreams under the Nasheed Administration.

Members of parliament have been called upon by the public to hold Prosecutor General accountable Muiz for neglecting his legal responsibilities by not pressing criminal charges against Sood. MPs have been requested by several members of the public to question PG Muiz on the issue while in session. The question is whether parliament will show the courage, daily demonstrated by the Judiciary now in protecting citizen rights.

In a landmark case, Ghassan Maumoon, the Dhivehi Raiyyithunge Party candidate for Thaa Thimarafushi, has successfully won an appeal to invalidate the Thimarafushi parliamentary vote. On June 11, the Maldives High Court declared that the parliamentary elections in Thimarafushi had not taken place in a free and fair environment. It found that several conditions of voting in Thimarafushi were in direct violation of the law, and that voting in Thimarafushi had taken place in a climate of terror and intimidation. The court ordered the Maldives Elections Commission to take a fresh vote for both ballot boxes in the constituency. Ghassan Maumoon’s appeal stated that, voting on Thimarafushi island took place under intimidation, threat and violence by supporters of Maldivian Democratic Party candidate, Thimarafushi Musthafa.

The High Court ordered the EC to ensure within 20 days that the island had a peaceful environment within which free and fair elections could be held as under Article 70 of the Maldives Constitution. It further ordered the EC to take a fresh vote within 30 days from the date of the court order. It also ordered the Maldives Security Forces, the police and the army, to assist the EC should it request assistance. The High Court ordered that the fresh vote should be taken under the observation and monitoring of the Maldives Human Rights Commission and international observers.

The decision by the High Court invalidates the EC’s decision that the MDP candidate Thimarafushi Musthafa had won the Thimarafushi seat. In the provisional results announced by the Commission for Thimarafushi, MDP candidate Musthafa lead DRP candidate Ghassan Maumoon by about 100 votes. It had required a High Court stay order to bar the EC from announcing this result. Although mountains of evidence were presented to the contrary, Deputy Commissioner of the EC Hussain Siraj has continued to adamantly contest Ghassan Maumoon’s case, asserting that no irregularities had taken place on that day, and that the vote and vote results were valid. Hussain Siraj is one of the lead lawyers of President Mohamed Nasheed’s MDP.

However, in delivering the court decision the High Court Judge Ali Hameed declared that evidence from the reports and depositions of the Maldives Human Rights Comission, the review panel of the Elections Commission, independent elections monitor Transparency Maldives and the IDP clearly showed that voting on Thimarafushi did not take place in a peaceful environment, but one which the rule of law was repeatedly violated. Evidence cited by the court included elderly being forced to vote, arson attack on a vessel belonging to a Ghassan Maumoon supporter, vandalism of Ghasssan Maumoon’s campaign office on the island, and actions by the Maldives Democratic Party to influence voters.

Concrete evidence was presented that the MDP candidate Musthafa’s supporters hijacked the ballot boxes twice during the voting process by rushing the voting area and forcing elections officials and Ghassan’s observers out of the area. After a lengthy delay during which the ballot box was in the hands of Musthafa’s supporters, ballot counting proceeded under police supervision. Ghassan’s observers were also prevented from attending the ballot counting. In addition, when the ballot box was sealed after counting, some ballots had been left outside the box. Other reports also validate those elections officials responsible for the election administration in the constituency refused to accept the Thimarafushi ballot box because the seal was broken when it reached them.

The High Court decision on Thimarafushi today brings into the foreground several other cases in which candidates have challenged that voting in their constituencies took place in violation of the law. These include the case of independent candidate Ahmed Shareef in the Lhaviyani Hinnavaru parliamentary vote, and that of Marz Saleem, DRP candidate for Hulhuhenveryru. In both cases, several violations of the law such as double voting, voting by minors, fear and intimidation of citizens and campaigning on voting day by the MDP candidate have been cited.

The High Court verdict of June 11th went against Maldives President Nasheed’s top financier, Thimarafushi Musthafa. Musthafa, a close friend and ally of President Nasheed, is a well known gang lord and loan shark, who heavily funds the MDP. President Nasheed’s MDP had in fact threatened the Judiciary with violence and unrest should the court decision not be in MDP’s favour. Speaking as an MDP rally on June 4th, MDP Parliamentary Group leader Reeko Moosa Maniku warned the High Court there would be civil unrest if the court ruling went against the MDP candidate. The warning was delivered in the midst of spate of attacks on opposition leaders and Ghassan supporters in Thimarafushi. The family home of a key witness for Ghassan Maumoon was torched by the MDP on the day of her deposition in court.

The High Court decision also throws into the spotlight the issue of missing ballot papers and falsified vote results sheets. At the court hearings on Ghassan Maumoon’s case, presiding Judge Ali Hameed specifically questioned the Elections Commission on irregularities in signatures on the elections results sheet, irregularities in the handover process of the ballot box to Elections Commission officials and on the issue of 115 ballot papers that were missing from the box. Upon close questioning, Deputy Elections Commissioner Hussain Siraj admitted that the ballot results sheet was falsified and that 155 ballot papers missing from the ballot box had disappeared before the ballot box had reached the Commission. The Elections Commissions had previously in court admitted violation of regulations on several issues in the case.

The issue of falsified results sheets has dogged the EC even at the time of the 2008 presidential elections. At that time, President Nasheed’s cousin by marriage Saabe was Deputy Commissioner of the EC. Commissioner Shahid, a top official in the MDP, resigned just prior to the elections saying that his wife, President Nasheed’s cousin Eva Abdulla, was contesting the parliamentary elections as an MDP candidate. However, in the days of vote counting and preparation of final results by the EC, ex-Commisioner Shahid was known to have accessed the vote data sheets. He was removed from the EC premises by police after public protested of illegal entry and illegal access to elections data by Shahid.

The High Court verdict declared that it is the mandate of the EC to ensure that electoral voting took place in a free and fair environment, one that was free from fear, intimidation, fighting and corruption, and in which every citizen could freely exercise their constitutional right to vote. It said that that it is a right of citizens to have such an environment, a right that could not be abrogated except in accordance with Article 16 of the Constitution.

The burning question is whether the EC will even try and ensure free and fair elections in the second round of voting in Thimarafushi. It has to be noted that, even though concrete evidence has been presented in court and in the public domain, the EC has so far failed to pursue legal action against any of the people who committed illegal acts during voting on the island that day. Similarly, the Prosecutor General also has shown extreme zealousness in pursing certain cases sent by the EC, while deferring others. A case in point is the case of the PG deciding to pursue legal action against Thoddoo MP Ali Waheed, while arbitrarily deciding to drop the same charges against the then presidential candidate Mohamed Nasheed.

There also remains the question of whether the Maldives Police Service can indeed provide support to ensure peaceful and free voting conditions. In the past month, the police, led by President Nasheed’s appointee Ahmed Faseeh, have shown a remarkable willingness to be used as a tool in Nasheed’s persecution of opposition leaders.

Much also depends on the independence and vigilance of the Maldives Human Rights Commission. Sadly, to date, the HRC appears to have cowed into silence by President Nasheed even as he continues to trample upon citizen rights day in day out.