Nasheed declined India's offer to stall coup, says report

[email protected] (CD Network)
January 19, 2013
Male/New Delhi, Jan 19: Two Indian naval ships were cruising about 40 km off the Maldives coast on the morning of Feb 7, 2012, hours before then president Mohamed Nasheed was ousted from power. But he decided not to seek India's intervention, a Maldivian newspaper reported.

This has been revealed to a Maldives parliamentary panel by former defence minister Tholhath Ibrahim Kaleyfaanu.nasheed

Nasheed, the country's first democratically elected president, did not want India to be involved in the day's dramatic and violent developments that saw him step down following opposition protests.

The then foreign minister Ahmed Naseem "had suggested that the Indian government would extend its assistance", Tholhath told the parliament's Government Accountability Committee that is reviewing an enquiry report into the "transfer of power" on Feb 7 last year, according to a report in the Haveeru daily, a leading newspaper in the Maldives.

"President said no. We cannot allow India to intervene in this matter. I will never agree to that. So it cannot be done," Haveeru quoted Tholhath as telling the panel. "Two ships were operating quite close, around 23 miles off Maldives. But the president was insistent. He didn't want to seek any assistance from India in the matter."

Then vice president Mohamed Waheed took over as president after Nasheed was made to step down.

Asked if the report about the presence of two Indian naval ships was true, an Indian external ministry official declined to respond. "We do not need to respond to anything that is being written," the official told IANS, and added "We will check the matter" of the naval ships.

Tholhath added that Nasheed was the one who knew that the Indian navy ships were in Maldivian territory, which could have been told to him by Naseem, the daily added.

When the parliamentary panel chair and Thoddoo constituency MP Ali Waheed asked him why the Indian ships were so close to Maldives, Tholhath said "I really don't know."

"I had no information on those ships. All I know is it was only on that morning I found out about those ships," he said.

"There was no confirmation that the ships were in fact so close to Maldives. I don't know any other details."

In response to a question of how to confirm the presence of the Indian ships on Feb 7, Tholhath said "the Maldives coast guard can verify it."

In August last year, the Commission of National Inquiry (CNI), constituted by the Maldives government to probe the "transfer of power" of Feb 7, said in its report that it was not a coup.

It also concluded that the transfer of power to Waheed was "legal and constitutional" and that Nasheed's resignation was voluntary without any coercion or intimidation.

Nasheed, who after his ouster visited various countries, such as the US and India, had claimed he had faced a threat to his life and that the power transfer was actually a coup.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
Agencies
February 10,2020

New delhi, Feb 10: The Supreme Court on Monday upheld the constitutional validity of the SC/ST Amendment Act, 2018, and said a court can grant anticipatory bail only in cases where a prima facie case is not made out.

A bench headed by Justice Arun Mishra said a preliminary inquiry is not essential before lodging an FIR under the act and the approval of senior police officials is not needed.

Justice Ravindra Bhat, the other member of the bench, said in a concurring verdict that every citizen needs to treat fellow citizens equally and foster the concept of fraternity.

Justice Bhat said a court can quash the FIR if a prima facie case is not made out under the SC/ST Act and the liberal use of anticipatory bail will defeat the intention of Parliament.

The top court's verdict came on a batch of PILs challenging the validity of the SC/ST Amendment Act of 2018, which was brought to nullify the effect of the apex court's 2018 ruling, which had diluted the provisions of the stringent Act.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
Agencies
January 15,2020

New Delhi, Jan 15: A Delhi court on Wednesday granted bail to Bhim Army chief Chandrashekhar Azad in connection with the Daryaganj violence case.

The court has ordered him not to hold any protest in Delhi till February 16th.

While hearing the case, the Judge had asked Azad's counsel to read out some of his social media posts.

Advocate Mehmood Pracha, representing Azad, had on Tuesday said that the petitioner was sent to jail without any evidence in connection with anti-CAA protests in Delhi's Darya Ganj area last year.

"I think the court's comments should become a precedent for the country. The Public Prosecutor at the behest of police tried to make this a communal issue. We told the court that the government has a problem with Azad because he made the CAA-NPR-NRC an issue for everyone. 
The Court also sought evidence," Pracha told ANI after Delhi's Tis Hazari court deferred the bail plea of Azad till today.

On Wednesday, the court pulled up the Delhi Police for failing to show any evidence against Azad.

Azad was arrested on December 21 last year after he led a march from Jama Masjid against the Citizenship (Amendment) Act. He was sent to judicial custody till January 18 at Tihar jail.

The Bhim Army chief was charged with rioting, unlawful assembly and inciting the mob to indulge in violence after vandalism in Delhi's Daryaganj area.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
News Network
March 20,2020

New Delhi, Mar 20: The four men convicted of the gang rape and murder of a Delhi woman on December 16, 2012 were hanged in the darkness of pre-dawn on Friday, ending a horrific chapter in India's long history of sexual assault that had seared the nation's soul. Mukesh Singh (32), Pawan Gupta (25), Vinay Sharma (26) and Akshay Kumar Singh (31) were executed at 5.30 am for the savage assault in an empty moving bus on the 23-year-old physiotherapy intern who came to be known the world over as Nirbhaya, the fearless one.

This is the first time that four men have been hanged together in Tihar Jail, South Asia's largest prison complex that houses more than 16,000 inmates. The executions were carried out after the men exhausted every possible legal avenue to escape the gallows. Their desperate attempts only postponed the inevitable by less than two months after the first date of execution was set for January 22.

They were hanged at 5.30 am, Director General of Prison Sandeep Goel said.

After raping and brutalising the woman, the men, one of whom was a juvenile at the time, dumped her on the road and left for dead on the cold winter night. Her friend who was with her was also severely beaten and thrown out along with her. She was so severely violated that her insides were spilling out when she was taken to hospital. She died in a Singapore hospital after battling for her life for a fortnight.

Six people, including the four convicts and the juvenile, were named as accused.

While Ram Singh allegedly committed suicide in the Tihar Jail days after the trial began in the case, the juvenile was released in 2015 after spending three years in a correctional home.

The road to the gallows was a long and circuitous one, going through the lower courts, the High Court, the Supreme Court and the president's office before going back to the Supreme Court that heard and rejected various curative petitions.

The death warrants were deferred by a court thrice on the grounds that the convicts had not exhausted all their legal remedies and that the mercy petition of one or the other was before the president.

On March 5, a trial court issued fresh death warrants for March 20 at 5.30 am as the final date for the execution.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.