Home / News / Urgent Appeals / MALDIVES: A political activist in solitary confinement after being arbitrarily arrested

MALDIVES: A political activist in solitary confinement after being arbitrarily arrested

October 13, 2004

URGENT ACTION URGENT ACTION URGENT ACTION URGENT ACTION URGENT ACTION

ASIAN HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION - URGENT APPEALS PROGRAM

13 October 2004
---------------------------------------------------------------------
UA-137-2004: MALDIVES: A political activist in solitary confinement after being arbitrarily arrested

MALDIVES: Political detainees; Arbitrary arrest and detention; Torture; Solitary confinement
---------------------------------------------------------------------

Dear friends,

The Asian Human Rights Commission (AHRC) has received information that political activist Mohamed Yoosuf was illegally arrested by the police in Maldives on 13 August 2004. Mr. Mohamed Yoosuf was put in solitary confinement at the Dhoonidhoo Detention Facility after seven days of his arrest and he has now been there for 53 days.  His family reported that he has been frequently tortured while in detention, and ill treated. The victim cannot access his family or lawyer, and nor can be access any physical and mental health facilities.

Your urgent action is required to urge the government of Maldives to order the immediate release of Mr. Mohamed Yoosuf.

Urgent Appeals Desk
Asian Human Rights Commission (AHRC)
-------------------------------------------------------

DETAILED INFORMATION:

Name of the victim: Mr. Mohamed Yoosuf (popularly known as Fulhu), 55 years old
Date of the arrest: 13 August 2004
Case status: The victim has been in solitary confinement at the Dhoonidhoo Detention Facility for 53 days after seven days of his arrest

Case details:

Maldives has been ruled by President Maumoon Abdul Gayoom as a one-party state since 1978. Despite fundamental rights being guaranteed in the national constitution, the government has so far resisted popular aspirations for genuine expression of these rights. After large demonstrations calling for democratic reform and a change of government that lasted several days, the government imposed a state of emergency on 13 August 2004, and mass arrests by the security forces followed. 
 
Mr. Mohamed Yoosuf was a signatory amongst many other people to a petition to establish a political party in Maldives, which was later rejected.  On 9 August 2004, Mr. Yusoof became aware that he and others might be arrested for supporting the idea of forming a political party.  In seeking to protect himself before his possible arrest, Mr. Mohamed Yoosuf left for Sri Lanka on August 9 and, according to what he told his family, he visited the American and British Embassies in Colombo and registered himself as a person who was involved in politics in the Maldives, so that the Embassies would recognize his arrest in case it happens. Mr. Mohamed Yoosuf also tried to contact Amnesty International to register himself as a member. He then returned to the Maldives on August 11. 

At about 4:00pm on August 12, Mr. Mohamed Yoosuf was arrested by the police while he was with several friends in a caf? When about 15 of Mr. Mohamed Yoosuf's friends visited the police station, the police told them that he would be released soon. At around 5:15pm of the same day, the victim's two family members went to meet the investigating officer at the police station. After waiting for two hours, they met the investigating officer, who also promised them that Yoosuf would be released soon. But he did not give the family members the reason for the victim's arrest. Accordingly, Mr. Mohamed Yusoof was released at 11:30pm on that day.   

However, Mr. Mohamed Yoosuf was arrested again on the following evening (August 13) at about 10:45pm by the police at his residence. Although he did not resist his arrest, the police allegedly pushed and handcuffed the victim in the process of his arrest. The family has not been allowed any access to Mr. Mohamed Yoosuf after his arrest. They wrote several letters to the government authorities requesting information about his current condition in the detention centre including his health, but no reply has yet been received.   

On September 11, Mr. Mohamed Yoosuf's family received the news that the victim was in a hospital to take an X-ray, and they rushed to the hospital to see him. The family found that Mr. Mohamed Yoosuf looked sick and very tired.  He informed his family that he was frequently tortured for the entire month while being handcuffed and blindfolded. He further told them that as a result of torture, he got injured on his back.
 
On September 16, the victim's family was allowed to meet Mr. Mohamed Yoosuf at the Dhoonidhoo Detention Facility for half an hour. Mr. Mohamed Yoosuf told them that after he was taken to the detention centre, he was handcuffed for about a week, and also blindfolded for two days.  Mr. Mohamed Yoosuf said that he was hit on his back severely, and remained handcuffed and blindfolded while eating, praying and using the toilet. He also mentioned that prison officials step on the prisoners (including himself) if they fall asleep to prevent them from sleeping. During the meeting, the police were present and tape-recorded their conversation.  

Mr. Mohamed Yoosuf was brought for further medical attention on October 7.  The family's request for independent medical assessment on the victim has been denied by the authorities. Mr. Mohamed Yoosuf has been in solitary confinement at the Dhoonidhoo Detention Facility for 53 days after seven days of his arrest. Access to reading and writing material has also been denied. Mr. Mohamed Yoosuf's family is gravely concerned about his mental and physical health under such inhuman circumstances. They even requested the government authorities to allow the victim to be held under house arrest rather than solitary confinement, which has been allowed to some other detainees. 

The AHRC has earlier issued a statement on the situation of political repression in the Maldives in recent months, (AS-28-2004: Government of Maldives must end intolerable rights abuses on 27 August 2004). Many persons have been arrested, detained and tortured illegally for a long time purely for political reasons of involvement in forming independent political parties, (refer to: AHRC Urgent Appeal: FA-20-2004: Incommunicado detention and fear of torture on civilians in Maldives).

The state of emergency was lifted on Sunday, 10 October 2004. However, there are many persons like Mr. Mohamed Yoosuf who continue to be detained without proper access to courts and the judicial process. They are also held in conditions which are contrary to the basic minimum standards. The AHRC urges the immediate release of Mr. Mohamed Yoosuf and should be allowed to access judicial remedies and physical and mental health facilities.

SUGGESTED ACTION:
Please send a letter, fax or an email to the addresses below and express your concern about this serious case.

Suggested letter:

Dear _________,

Re: Mr. Mohamed Yoosuf is in solitary confinement for 60 days at Dhoonidhoo Detention Facility in Solitary Confinement in the Maldives

Name of the victim: Mr. Mohamed Yoosuf (popularly known as Fulhu), 55 years old
Date of the arrest: 13 August 2004
Case status: The victim has been in solitary confinement at the Dhoonidhoo Detention Facility for 53 days after seven days of his arrest

I am shocked to learn about the plight of Mr. Mohamed Yoosuf, who is presently being held at the Dhoonidhoo Detention Facility. 

According to the information I have received, Mr. Mohamed Yoosuf has been in consecutive solitary confinement at the detention centre since his arrest on 13 August 2004. The victim reported to his family that he has been frequently tortured and ill treated while in detention. The victim had been handcuffed for over one week and blindfolded for two days for the first time after his arrest. He has also been prevented from sleeping. The victim is currently in solitary confinement at the Dhoonidhoo Detention Facility. 

I also want to draw your attention to the fact that the victim's family has not been given access to the victim except for a brief period of half an hour on one occasion. Even this meeting was in the presence of a police officer and the conversation was recorded.  No direct access to lawyers and the judicial process has been provided to the victim. More seriously, although two months have passed, neither the victim nor his family have been informed of the reason for his arrest and detention by any government authorities.

I urge the government of Maldives to release Mr. Mohamed Yoosuf immediately, and that the matter of his illegal arrest, detention and torture be investigated as thoroughly as possible, and action taken against the perpetrators.  I also urge the government of Maldives that other persons, who have been detained in the same conditions as Mr. Mohamed Yoosuf, also be released immediately. 

I look for your urgent intervention into this matter.

Truly yours,

------------------

Send a letter to:

1. Diplomatic Missions
High Commission of the Republic of Maldives in Sri Lanka
23, Kaviratne Place
Colombo 6
Sri Lanka
Tel: +(94) 11 2 586762/580076/500943
Telex: 22469 MALEMB CE
Telefax: +(94) 11 2 581200
E-mail: maldhc@isplanka.lk

2. High Commission of the Republic of Maldives in The United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland
22 Nottingham Place
London W1U 5NJ
United Kingdom
Tel: +(44) 171 224 2135 (Two Lines)
Telex: 051-921494 MALDIG
Telefax: +(44) 171 224 2157
E-mail: maldives.high.commission@virgin.net

3. Permanent Mission of the Republic of Maldives to the United Nations
800 Second Avenue
Suite 400-E, New York
N.Y. 10017
United States of America
Tel: 1-212-599-6195
Telefax: 1-212-661-6405, 1-212-972-3970
E-mail: maldives@un.int, maldives@onecommonwealth.org

Send a copy to:

1. Mr. Theo C. van Boven
Special Rapporteur on the Question of Torture
OHCHR-UNOG
8-14 Avenue de la Paix
1211 Geneva 10
SWITZERLAND
Fax: +41 22 917 9016

2. Ms Manuela Carmema Castrillo
Working group on arbitrary detention
C/o OHCHR-UNOG,
1211 Geneva 10
SWITZERLAND
Fax: +41 22 917 9006


Thank you.

Urgent Appeals Programme
Asian Human Rights Commission (AHRC)
Document Type :
Urgent Appeal Case
Document ID :
UA-137-2004
Issues :
Document Actions
Share |
Subscribe to our Mailing List
Follow AHRC
Extended Introduction: Urgent Appeals, theory and practice

A need for dialogue

Many people across Asia are frustrated by the widespread lack of respect for human rights in their countries.  Some may be unhappy about the limitations on the freedom of expression or restrictions on privacy, while some are affected by police brutality and military killings.  Many others are frustrated with the absence of rights on labour issues, the environment, gender and the like. 

Yet the expression of this frustration tends to stay firmly in the private sphere.  People complain among friends and family and within their social circles, but often on a low profile basis. This kind of public discourse is not usually an effective measure of the situation in a country because it is so hard to monitor. 

Though the media may cover the issues in a broad manner they rarely broadcast the private fears and anxieties of the average person.  And along with censorship – a common blight in Asia – there is also often a conscious attempt in the media to reflect a positive or at least sober mood at home, where expressions of domestic malcontent are discouraged as unfashionably unpatriotic. Talking about issues like torture is rarely encouraged in the public realm.

There may also be unwritten, possibly unconscious social taboos that stop the public reflection of private grievances.  Where authoritarian control is tight, sophisticated strategies are put into play by equally sophisticated media practices to keep complaints out of the public space, sometimes very subtly.  In other places an inner consensus is influenced by the privileged section of a society, which can control social expression of those less fortunate.  Moral and ethical qualms can also be an obstacle.

In this way, causes for complaint go unaddressed, un-discussed and unresolved and oppression in its many forms, self perpetuates.  For any action to arise out of private frustration, people need ways to get these issues into the public sphere.

Changing society

In the past bridging this gap was a formidable task; it relied on channels of public expression that required money and were therefore controlled by investors.  Printing presses were expensive, which blocked the gate to expression to anyone without money.  Except in times of revolution the media in Asia has tended to serve the well-off and sideline or misrepresent the poor.

Still, thanks to the IT revolution it is now possible to communicate with large audiences at little cost.  In this situation there is a real avenue for taking issues from private to public, regardless of the class or caste of the individual.

Practical action

The AHRC Urgent Appeals system was created to give a voice to those affected by human rights violations, and by doing so, to create a network of support and open avenues for action.  If X’s freedom of expression is denied, if Y is tortured by someone in power or if Z finds his or her labour rights abused, the incident can be swiftly and effectively broadcast and dealt with. The resulting solidarity can lead to action, resolution and change. And as more people understand their rights and follow suit, as the human rights consciousness grows, change happens faster. The Internet has become one of the human rights community’s most powerful tools.   

At the core of the Urgent Appeals Program is the recording of human rights violations at a grass roots level with objectivity, sympathy and competence. Our information is firstly gathered on the ground, close to the victim of the violation, and is then broadcast by a team of advocates, who can apply decades of experience in the field and a working knowledge of the international human rights arena. The flow of information – due to domestic restrictions – often goes from the source and out to the international community via our program, which then builds a pressure for action that steadily makes its way back to the source through his or her own government.   However these cases in bulk create a narrative – and this is most important aspect of our program. As noted by Sri Lankan human rights lawyer and director of the Asian Human Rights Commission, Basil Fernando:

"The urgent appeal introduces narrative as the driving force for social change. This idea was well expressed in the film Amistad, regarding the issue of slavery. The old man in the film, former president and lawyer, states that to resolve this historical problem it is very essential to know the narrative of the people. It was on this basis that a court case is conducted later. The AHRC establishes the narrative of human rights violations through the urgent appeals. If the narrative is right, the organisation will be doing all right."

Patterns start to emerge as violations are documented across the continent, allowing us to take a more authoritative, systemic response, and to pinpoint the systems within each country that are breaking down. This way we are able to discover and explain why and how violations take place, and how they can most effectively be addressed. On this path, larger audiences have opened up to us and become involved: international NGOs and think tanks, national human rights commissions and United Nations bodies.  The program and its coordinators have become a well-used tool for the international media and for human rights education programs. All this helps pave the way for radical reforms to improve, protect and to promote human rights in the region.