Announcements



announcement

Transparency Maldives
Layout and Graphic Designer



announcement

Advertise your job/event/promo on Minivan News

 

announcement


Page added on June 6, 2012

Former Commission of National Inquiry panel releases timeline “for public opinion”

Former Commission of National Inquiry panel releases timeline “for public opinion” thumbnail

The former three-member panel of the Commission of National Inquiry (CNI) has released a ‘timeline’ of events it claims took place from the period of January 16 to February 7, for the stated purpose of “finding public opinion”.

The composition of the panel has since been revised to include a representative of former President Mohamed Nasheed and a retired Singaporean judge, as well as international monitors from both the Commonwealth and UN.

The 282-point Dhivehi document does not feature any input from the Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP), who contested the panel’s impartiality prior to the re-composition. The report begins its findings on the day police attempted to summon Chief Judge of the Criminal Court, to the day the controversial transfer of power took place. The panel conducted interviews with assorted non-MDP participants, however the report does not source its findings.

The night of February 6

The timeline suggests the initial ‘turning point’ of the unrest began on the night of February 6, after the supporters of the Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) arrived at the artificial beach in Male’ where supporters of the coalition of then-opposition parties had already been protesting, calling for the release of Judge Abdulla and for the constitution to be upheld.

The timeline states that the Specialist Operation (SO) officers of the police had stationed themselves in Heniveru Stadium, in preparation to prevent any violence that may have taken place if supporters from both sides clashed.

The report stated that police intervened after they received information that the situation was deteriorating from two police officers who were there to assess the situation.

It states that police intervention calmed the situation and cordoned a security line between the two protesting parties, after forcing them further behind the sides of the area they had been protesting.

The three member panel alleged that Minister of Home Affairs Hassan Afeef ordered Commissioner of Police Ahmed Faseeh to withdraw police officers who had been stationed on the site. The Commissioner sent two officers to assess the situation, who reported back stating that the situation had deteriorated, which the Commissioner relayed to the Minister.

The Minister repeated the order but the Commissioner of Police refused to comply, stating that the situation could get worse if the police withdrew their forces.

According to the report, after the commissioner refused, President Nasheed himself called the commissioner and ordered him to withdraw police from the scene.

Faseeh then reportedly sent the Deputy Commissioner of Police to assess the situation, and he too relayed the situation was worsening.

The report claimed that the president called the commissioner a second time and ordered him to withdraw police from the area, stating that he “could not trust the police”.

After this order, the report said that the commissioner personally took the decision to contact the Male’ Area Commander of the Maldives National Defence Force (MNDF), asking that the MNDF intervene as the police were withdrawing.

The statement read that the tactical officer of the SO opposed the idea of withdrawing police from the area, stating that both the protesting parties had weapons that could be used for violence, including wooden sticks and metal rods.

The SO police present in the area refused to withdraw without the MNDF arriving to take over their position, the timeline claimed.

The panel also claimed that a resignation letter was drafted by the police commissioner and was left on his table, as “the commissioner did not believe that the withdrawal of the police was the right decision.”

After the MNDF took over the area, the panel claimed that President Nasheed called the Male’ area commander and ordered him to withdraw MNDF officers from the area, giving him assurances that the MDP supporters would not resort to any kind of violence.

However, the statement read that when MNDF withdrew their officers from the area, violent confrontations began and there “bottles and objects” thrown by both protesting parties, which led the MNDF to intervene again.

February 7

The statement claimed that some of the SO police officers who had been in the Artifical Beach area then went to the MDP protest camp and vandalised the premises, and attacked some of the MDP supporters inside.

An MNDF SWAT team arrived after the SO police officers left premises, “to guard the area”, the panel stated.

The statement read that, as the usual routine of the police is to fall in at the Republican Square after protests ended; the police officers retreated and convened to the area.

The panel said that initially the MNDF attempted to arrest the police officers who by then had begun to gather in Republic Square, adjacent to police and military headquarters. However the MNDF reportedly decided to negotiate with the police officers as the military was outnumbered and police had similar equipment to the MNDF officers.

According to the report, police told the MNDF officers who were sent to negotiate with them that would begin following orders again after they were given assurances that they would not be ordered to carry out any unlawful orders, and that no action be taken against any of the officers regarding their involvement.

“The MNDF officers assured them that the MNDF would not confront police officers in the area,” the panel claimed.

During the negotiations, the panel claimed that police requested to meet the commissioner of police. The MNDF officials proposed officers go into the MNDF headquarters to to meet the commissioner, but police said they wanted to meet the commissioner inside police headquarters.

It was decided that the commissioner would meet meet in Iskandhar Koshi, an MNDF barracks on the other side of Male’, to the police officers initially agreed. However, police rejected the idea after the MNDF insisted the police go without their weapons and riot gear.

President’s arrival to Republic Square and his resignation

The panel claimed that in the early morning of February 7, between 5:00am to 6:00am, President Nasheed informed the commissioner that he wanted to meet the police officers who were at Republican Square.

It further claimed that the President also ordered the commissioner to meet the police officers in Republic Square, however the commissioner left military headquarters and entered police headquarters without meeting police gathered outside the building.

Before meeting the police, Nasheed asked one of the MNDF commanders whether he had any reservations over arresting the protesting police officers, to which the commander reportedly replied that he did.

The President then reportedly told the commander that it would be better if he stayed at home for the time being, however two other commanders also told the President that they had reservations and left.

The panel claimed that Nasheed then told the police officers that they had “done something wrong” and requested they hand themselves over to the MNDF. Police refused the order.

According the panel, Nasheed then returned to military headquarters and ordered the MNDF officers inside the barracks to go outside and arrest the officers who had disobeyed him.

At this point, some of the MNDF officers left the barracks and joined the police officers protesting.

While Nasheed was inside the MNDF base, the panel claimed that the President’s secretariat informed cabinet members that there would be a cabinet meeting, but failed to inform Vice President Dr Mohamed Waheed Hassan as two key staff of the VP’s secretariat had not reported to work.

The panel also claimed that the then-President of the MDP, Dr Ibrahim Didi, called Nasheed and discussed how to resolve the ongoing unrest. Nasheed reportedly asked for Didi’s help in releasing a joint statement by the president and leaders of the opposition parties.

It said that Didi had then contacted opposition Dhivehi Rayyithunge Party (DRP) leader Ahmed Thasmeen Ali and Progressive Party of the Maldives (PPM) Parliamentary Group Leader, Abdulla Yameen, however both of them declined to help unless Nasheed personally requested they do so.

Dr Didi then informed Nasheed of this response, who told him to make a decision after discussing the matter with MDP Parliamentary Group Leader MP Ibrahim Mohamed Solih and former Chairperson of the Party, MP Mariya Ahmed Didi.

The panel alleged that Dr Didi tried contacting MP Mariya Ahmed Didi, who did not respond, and then contacted MP Ibrahim Mohamed Solih, who said he would get back to Dr Didi after consulting on the issue with Nasheed.

After the reply from MP Solih was delayed, Didi reportedly called Nasheed back, and was told that the High Commissioner of India, Dnyaneshwar M Mulay, would contact him.

According to the panel, Mulay contacted Dr Didi and asked him to come to the High Commission. When Dr Didi arrived to the High Commission, the opposition Progressive Party of the Maldives (PPM) Parliamentary Group leader Yameen was already there.

According to the panel, as Dr Didi, Mulay and Yameen were discussing how to resolve the crisis, MP Solih called Yameen and informed him that Nasheed was going to resign.

Didi then reportedly contacted Nasheed and asked to him to give the phone to Yameen.

According to the panel, Nasheed informed Yameen that he was going to resign and asked him to ensure the safety of his family, to which Yameen replied that he would do everything to ensure the safety of Nasheed’s family.

The meeting adjourned after the president informed them that he would resign.

New MNDF commander

Meanwhile, according to the panel, two civilians: resigned police officer Abdulla Riyaz (the new Police Commissioner) and dismissed MNDF officer Ahmed Nazim (now the Defence Minister), entered the MNDF headquarters reportedly on the invitation of the Minister of Defence and National Security, Tholath Ibrahim.

After discussions with Nasheed in the MNDF barracks, Nazim came out to the crowd and revealed that he had asked Nasheed to resign unconditionally before 1:30pm that afternoon, along with the commissioner of police and his deputies.

According to the panel, Nazim told the crowd that his demands were “non-negotiable”.

The protesters were then informed that Nasheed would resign, and would announce this in the President’s Office.

According to the panel, Nasheed wrote the resignation letter inside the President’s Office, and then announced it on state television – which by this stage had been stormed by a second group of police and protesters.

CNI statement “lacks legitimacy

The MDP – now in opposition – said it would not formally comment on the statement prior to the release of an official statement.

However, an MDP official told Minivan News that the party did not consider the timeline “substantial”, and said it “lacked legitimacy”.

The party was “not even interested” in the timeline because the investigation would start from scratch under the new composition.

”The Commonwealth Ministerial Action Group (CMAG) has asked the government to change the composition of the commission and the government has agreed to it. I think the current co-chair of the commission thinks that his work is over,” the party official said.

The premature release of the timeline “for public comment” was “not a good thing”, he added.

The CNI claimed that if anyone wished to propose amendments to the timeline, they should submit amendments before June 21.

FacebookTwitterEmailGoogle GmailMySpaceGoogle+BeboSina WeiboShare


23 Comments on "Former Commission of National Inquiry panel releases timeline “for public opinion”"

  1. ibra on Wed, 6th Jun 2012 7:30 PM 

    This clearly proves that Anni resigned voluntarily.

  2. Ali Shiyam on Wed, 6th Jun 2012 8:06 PM 

    According to this, Anni selected the wire, set the noose, put his head in and hung himself.

    If this is true, Anni has made the blunder himself and he has since them realized a lot of his loyal followers on his payroll are frustrated and now have convinced him to flip the real story.

  3. no name idess on Wed, 6th Jun 2012 8:07 PM 

    mohamed nahee sounds rather aprehensive. the tension is quite palpable.

  4. Mohm Shiraz - uninhabited on Wed, 6th Jun 2012 10:06 PM 

    You dont read this ????

    *** After discussions with Nasheed in the MNDF barracks, Nazim came out to the crowd and revealed that he had asked Nasheed to resign unconditionally before 1:30pm that afternoon, along with the commissioner of police and his deputies ***
    Means an EX dismissed MNDF officer tells the crowd ho he threatened president Anni … which is not “strange” ? A civilian commanding …

    Some people really never will see

  5. Ibrahim on Wed, 6th Jun 2012 10:47 PM 

    all of it sypathized with the perpetrators while victims of the coup became culprits. Why on earth did the Police officers who claimed to stop violence at a protest go and violently attack MDP officials in their Party Haruge.Why have they then demanded to meet their commissioner while they armed arme and conducting a mutinee. How could he come and face such a crowd while he was not assured of his safety.
    WHy dont you accept that apolice service sworn to protect their commander refused his orders while clearly they were mutineers.
    Last but notleast they could not understand the duress and pressure the elected leader has to undergo when the forces sworn to protect him were helpless due to actions of some people. Well whether Nazim was invited or begged to come there, can he take command and control and demand unconditional resignation. We heard demands for unconditional resignation before we heard anything about Nasheed’s resignation. How come it be voluntary resignation when it was demanded from mutineers belonging to the only two bodies sworn to protect their cheif commander.
    when it came to perpetrators humanity ground and sympathy was clearly shown by CoNI. But when it came to victim, he was made fully responsible for everything without even thinking the duress and presure to which he was exposed, eliminating all grounds of help. Even the most reliable high commisioner was in a dilemma.Demands for unconditional resignation was made and coup perpetrators and collaborators joined with mutineers.This resulted in duress which lead to resignation. Whether it was voluntary or notonly GOD knows

  6. Beyond the Grave on Thu, 7th Jun 2012 1:30 AM 

    ”a time line for public opinion”?
    If you needed public opinion, why not hold a public referendum in the first place?
    As Dr Yasir concurred in an earlier briefing,the report is going to be ‘incomplete’; will be left for public interpretation- an expensive, irrelevant and ineffectual information piece!

  7. tsk tsk on Thu, 7th Jun 2012 3:12 AM 

    @Ibrahim:

    We will never go forward with this debate if we are to ask half the questions based on our own personal mindset.

    Let’s start at the top shall we?

    Why did all parties remain silent while a coalition contested the Presidential election in 2008 leading people to believe that a unified group of interests was coming into power while our system of governance did not allow it?

    Why was that same coalition allowed to dupe the people into believing that a test of confidence in the government could be conducted in the middle of Nasheed’s term while the Constitution did not allow it?

    Why did the opposition after gaining control of the Parliament do everything in its power to prevent the Executive from moving forward?

    Why did the ruling regime retaliate in full force by casting aside the laws that were supposed to bind? We must never forget that the Executive tried to wrest control of the judiciary and also tried to lock up two opposition leaders.

    Why did the judiciary behave as if it was an army within a fortress leaving aside important reforms while choosing to consolidate their political power?

    Why did the ruling regime give up on dialogue altogether thereby betraying the people and working to expand their influence and dismantle all safeguards against authoritarianism?

    Why was the media used as a tool for defamation and character assassination while innocent youth interested in journalism got caught up and was harmed in the process?

    Why did the Nasheed regime insist on creating a Ministry of Islamic Affairs headed by a Wahhabi movement while masquerading as if they were the champions of secularism?

    Why do some of us refuse to acknowledge that as long as Islam is a all-pervasive and unifying ideal it will always remain a political force?

    Why did the Nasheed-regime react to an opposition movement based on religious lines by attacking businesses, threatening to silence the media and arresting politicians?

    Why was that all-too-familiar Judge really kidnapped and detained outside the law?

    What was the opposition so afraid of that they could not wait until elections to demand Nasheed’s immediate resignation?

    Why was our Parliament, Judiciary and independent institutions helpless when the country was thrown into turmoil and open warfare?

    Where was the international community when all these democratic slip-ups happened over the course of these past three years?

    Where shall we go from now? My answer to this question is that we should try to move forward with democracy while also trying to fit it into our cultural context. We should also lay down our arms and set aside our differences to try and bring peace and stability to this country which is a must for the rest of it all to follow.

  8. Raalu on Thu, 7th Jun 2012 3:43 AM 

    Totally bias and twisted to protect he illegal coup regime. Utter nonsense!!!

  9. Ahmed bin Addu bin Suvadheeb on Thu, 7th Jun 2012 6:51 AM 

    Here’s my “public opinion” on this.

    The timing of, ahem, “timeline” is rather suspicious. Just as the CNI is being reformulated to the standards agreeable by everyone, we have a version from a committe that was not recognised by anyone except those who took power. Clearly, this raises a lot more questions.

    The CNI was not formed with a mandate to gather “public opinion”. The mandate of the CNI was also reformulated in conjuction with international demands for impartiality. I wonder what that mandate has to say about gathering “public opinion” before the CNI in its new form has even begun its work.

    Whatever was collected by the CNI has to be reviewed and acted upon by the newly formed committee before it is disseminated to the public for “public opinion”.

    Finally, what is the purpose of “public opinion”? I was under the impression that the purpose of the CNI was to gather evidence and there was no mention of gathering “opinion”! The regime has got a lot to answer for!

  10. Independent Guy on Thu, 7th Jun 2012 8:33 AM 

    The article seems to miss one interesting point in the report.

    In the early morning of 7th February 2012, the then Minister of Defence (reportedly) requested the MNDF who had cordoned off the area to allow a party of MDP supporters to enter the Republican square. Acting on the Ministers orders, the MNDF withdrew their cordons to allow MDP supporters to enter the area. After that, a pickup carrying MDP activists armed with wooden planks and some forms of sharp weapons arrived on the corner off Reefside. After which the armed activists (reportedly) proceeded to assualt the gathered police officers. Police managed to quell the attack and disperse the MDP activists who had decided to confront the police.

    This point seems to have been missed by the article, so i thought i would post it here.

  11. rough on Thu, 7th Jun 2012 10:00 AM 

    stupid idiotic commission ……why do we have to spend time on this if you need public opinion ,go for a poll whether it is a coup or not. the government seems to be fooling around the public

  12. Ali Shiyam on Thu, 7th Jun 2012 10:31 AM 

    Brilliant piece of work and strategy.

    Pass the buck to the public and distance yourself from the paper. You can for sure then claim, the public compiled the report.

    Who knows; With the current state of street executions, any personal signatures on a report like this, may put them on cross hairs.

  13. Mohamed Waheed on Thu, 7th Jun 2012 10:44 AM 

    A well planned coup…. well planned takeover…. a report timeline that is sung like a song …. this is nothing but “MOCKERY OF JUSTICE” by a handful of Bhagees against the conscience of a whole nation.

  14. nova on Thu, 7th Jun 2012 12:50 PM 

    Hamid Abdul Gafoor is now criticizing the Commission because it has opened its findings to the public before coming to a conclusion.

    But if it was done otherwise, MDP would have criticized it still citing lack of transparency.

    Either MDP is just hard to satisfy or they are making up way too many excuses.

  15. me on Thu, 7th Jun 2012 1:39 PM 

    i wonder why CNI forgot to mentioned Mr Nazim’s announcement that he is the commander in chief before Mr nasheed’s “resignation”. who has given this title to him…

  16. JUSTICE on Thu, 7th Jun 2012 1:53 PM 

    If these 3 people wanted real fact, they would have to be interviewing everyone concerned and alike.

    I would agree with the writer of this article that and interview with a bunch of assorted people, even it were exaggerated by the writer would make this opinion unbiased and without prejudice.

    My opinion is that this is a shoddy piece of work by a company of “branded” people who had a set opinion, before they started work!

  17. mariyam on Thu, 7th Jun 2012 3:35 PM 

    The three musketeers in the CNI has shown that they lack good character and integrity. A desperate attempt to misguide the public, shows how desperate the coup government is getting really.

  18. hubble telescope on Thu, 7th Jun 2012 8:59 PM 

    Hey this is good enough to believe that this is not a coup, Am i right.

  19. al-yamaani on Fri, 8th Jun 2012 5:14 AM 

    ismail shafeeu what the hell you are doing you have proven that you are hungry for the nations blood shame on you and dr. yasir what an idiot you are please don’t play with fire. the people of this nation will not forgive you baghee waheed has to leave office soon and Dictator Maumoon will not be able to save you from public

  20. Nashyd on Sat, 9th Jun 2012 1:12 AM 

    Maumoon and Waheed are the heroes of today.

  21. shahu on Sat, 9th Jun 2012 2:08 AM 

    minivan is pretty clever leaving all the dirty politics MDP played on the night of 6th february and morning of 7th february.this shows how biased you people are. anyways now most people of this country know what a stupid bird brained(not a crow(khaalhu) brained as a crow is clever)bullshit of a person anni is(i really am sickened to say he was a president)i salute MNDF as they were the saviour of this nation and has always been.remember 3rd november 1988.anni tried to create the same situation(his uncle and family created 3rd nov,16 martys including shaheed hussein adam i still weep when i see his baby like face. how can we compare shaheed adam with anni, oh god “NEVER” ANNI IS FULL OF PIGSHIT) on 7th february but to his disappointment.i was hoping he would go mad.we’ll never leave our soldiers for a dump lying person like flat dhombe. WE LOVE YOU MNDF

  22. IndependentGuy on Sat, 9th Jun 2012 1:47 PM 

    Also, the question arises, are the Police commissioner and the Deputy Police commissioner (appointed by Nasheed during his presidency) telling the truth ?

    That Nasheed (and then Home Minister Afeef) personally called them and asked them to carry out orders favouring MDP activists ? And that Nasheed personally ordered them to order Police to stand down while MDP activists beat the crap out of the gathered opposition activists ?

    I find it disgraceful that Faseeh is telling such information to the Commission of National Inquiry. Even if the said events took place, Faseeh should have backed Nasheed and Afeef, and defended their orders to withdraw police from Artificial beach area, since it was Nasheed who gave him such a promotion. Faseeh is becoming a traitor to MDP by revealing these things.

  23. shahu on Sun, 10th Jun 2012 2:15 AM 

    and leave the country for bloodshed.we all know who the real traitors are.


  • fh: if you say ” alcohol is a drug ” why not screen every single tourist leaving the country. I think the courts will have plenty of work, as it would be...
  • Hassan Waheed: Aren’t these guys ashamed to parade our youngsters like this in public? How about that judge guy sitting on the bench? He is still allowed to sit...
  • i: this is becoming a political issue again for MDP, but the witness said that those who have possession of drugs is only arrested and it means they’ve break the...
  • Maldivian: The courts are surprisingly good at beating up and prosecuting average people, and even better at letting drug lords go for fun.
  • Fishy: For some people drinking, dancing, is immoral, for me when I see people bend, kiss the ground mumble and are hallucinated through mysticism is immoral and...
  • Maldivian: I hope you’ve learned not to trust the enemy now, Angie.
  • Lunatic: @Ravin Loony You sure that’s a good idea? You could be enjoying the sea breeze when a drugged-up policeman arrests you for ‘being under the...
  • Hero's smelly friend: Hero, corrupt politicians aren’t considered people. You guys will have to pay reparations. Maybe an atoll. Ha ha!

announcement

Torture victims in the Maldives tell their stories