Government: Nazim did not file any complaint claiming arbitrary detention

Maldivian government has commented the former Minister of Defense, Colonel (Retired) Mohamed Nazim did not file any complaint to any relevant court claiming arbitrary detention, either during the investigation into weapons found in his apartment, or after.

United Nations Working Group on Arbitrary Detention completed its investigation into Nazim’s 11-year-prison conviction and released their findings over the weekend.

In its report, UNWGAD called for Nazim’s immediate release, and demanded Maldivian government compensate him for the violation of his rights.

During the press conference by Maldivian government at President’s Office this Monday afternoon, Minister of Foreign Affairs, Dr. Mohamed Asim challenged UNWGAD’s report, and stated that due process had been followed throughout all stages of criminal justice process in Nazim’s case.

Reading Maldivian government’s official statement regarding UNWGAD’s report, Minister Asim that Maldives was an independent and sovereign nation, and called out for the international community to respect rulings issued by Maldivian courts.

Asim said that Nazim had never filed a suit with any court claiming arbitrary detention, either during the investigation into his case, or at any point afterwards.

“I note that if Nazim had any complaint over arbitrary detention, he had the right, as well as opportunity to file the complaint with a relevant court,” said Minister Azim, appealing to UNWGAD to encourage Nazim to exercise the right.

Asim said some information had been omitted from the report by UNWGAD, including the information provided by Maldivian government to support its claim Nazim had a free and fair trial.

He said UNWGAD also omitted the information that Nazim had been transferred to house arrest from April 2016 onwards.

Minister Asim also challenged the reference made in the report to some NGO’s in Maldives as “human rights experts”.

“Maldivian government is deeply saddened by references made in the working group’s report to articles submitted by some Maldivian NGO’s regarding the political situation of the country, calling such organizations “human rights experts”. UN’s working groups should be able to look into cases submitted to it with impartiality and independence,” he said.

Asim said that despite UNWGAD’s claim it wanted to work with the Maldivian government, it was sad it made the offer only after submitting its report and not before.

He said that Maldivian government was ready to work with UN human rights agencies and other bodies, but that the Maldivian government would not meddle into the judiciary system of the country.

“It’s important that work by United Nations Working Group on Arbitrary Detention is impartial, trustworthy, and free of opinions expressed by the media,” read the Maldivian government’s statement.

UNWGAD said in its report that State prosecution needed to prove the weapons found in Nazim’s apartment were his, given claims it was planted there to frame Nazim.

Addressing the statement, Minister of Fisheries and Agriculture Dr. Mohamed Shainee, in an interview in Television Maldives’ “Rajje Miadhu” show, said that possession of illegal was a structural liability offense in Maldives, and that the State prosecution therefore did not prove to court that the weapons belonged to Nazim.

“The crime he was charged with is a structural liability offense. Its evidence doesn’t need to be provided by the State. It needs to be provided by the offender,” said Shainee.

Points noted in UNWGAD’s report:

• Weapons and bullets found in Nazim’s bedroom were planted there by police. And there was therefore an attempt made to frame Nazim.

• 5-day period provided by Criminal Court is insufficient based on the severity of the charge. And defense was blocked from calling a number of witnesses for testimony, and testimony of multiple witnesses were not heard.

• Nazim was not sufficiently provided information on State witnesses.

• Criminal Court failed to provide Nazim’s lawyers with reports and other documents needed for appeal during the appeal duration.

• Responsibility of proving the weapons found belonged to Nazim was shifted off State prosecution, and responsibility of proving the weapons found did not belong to Nazim fell to the defense.

• High Court taking five months to hear the appeal. And Supreme Court rejecting request to order High Court to expedite appeal.