Elections Commission on Sunday stated that the constitutional case filed at the Supreme Court to nullify the recently held Presidential Election, was based on groundless suspicions without any evidence.
The statement was given by the EC's lawyer Hussain Shameem at the first hearing of the case held by the apex court on Sunday afternoon. The case was filed by President Abdulla Yameen Abdul Gayoom, the candidate of ruling Progressive Party of Maldives (PPM) who lost the September 23rd election to opposition candidate Ibrahim Mohamed Solih by a wide margin of 38,000 votes.
Speaking at the hearing, Shameem declared that the election proceedings were in accordance with the law and Supreme Court's guidelines. He proclaimed that President Yameen's case against the election results were based only on doubts and suspicions.
Shameem claimed that the incumbent president's side has not submitted any concrete evidence to back their accusations. Noting that an election can be annulled only under circumstances that affected the polling results, Shameem pointed out that while President Yameen had lost by 38,000 votes, he had not clarified the amount of votes he supposedly lost due to the alleged rigging.
Responding to the ruling party's allegation that printing of ballot papers was awarded unlawfully to M7 Print Pvt Ltd without bid, Shameem declared that it was awarded as per the Public Finance Act, with the permission of the Minister of Finance and Treasury.
He also rebutted allegations of lacking security at the location where the ballot papers were stored prior to polling day. According to Shameem, only authorised personnel of EC were allowed to enter while their entry logs were recorded in the presence of police officers, who were stationed to oversee security. Shameem went on to state that surveillance cameras were installed at the place, while the entry logs were also forwarded to the Supreme Court.
The ruling party has also raised accusations that pens with delible ink, and rings that could be used to place checkmarks, had been used at polling stations. Shameem responded to the claims, pointing out that EC had encouraged voters to bring their own pens if they wished.
EC also countered the concern raised by the president over abruptly shifting the National Complaints Bureau to another location, saying that it curbed the opportunity for the public to submit complaints regarding the election. Shameen replied that despite the shift, the Complaints Bureau had always been open to receive complaints. He highlighted that over 400 complaints had been submitted by the given deadline, and that the bureau had promptly responded to all.
Another issue highlighted in the case was that UV light was not used to check the legitimacy of ballot papers, which raised doubts whether illegitimate ballots had been added to the boxes. However, Shameem stated that the EC was not lawfully obliged to use UV light, and that there had not been any complaints received of illegitimate ballot papers.
Shameem went on to say the commission had addressed issues of voting booth arrangements that compromised the anonymity of votes. He also stated that EC had received 38 complaints about voters illegally taking handbags and mobile phones inside voting centres, and that the commission is currently investigating the officials who were stationed at them.
The lawyer also stated that the EC had received only six complaints of illegal campaign activities carried out during polling, thus indicating that such actions had not been carried out widely.
In addition, Shameem denied accusations that more than the allocated number of ballot papers had been counted from a box in reclaimed suburb Hulhumale. He elaborated that the only issue with the box was a miscount of the number of men and women who had cast their ballots into the box, and that this was evident from the box's results sheet.
Moreover, Shameem noted that an issue of a voter casting his ballot at the wrong polling station had surfaced. However, how the issue occurred was clear from the box's report and, thus, could not warrant a nullification of the presidential election, he said.
Speaking in defence of EC at the hearing, Shameem further declared that while the Elections General Act clearly specified that electoral issues must be filed at the High Court, President Yameen had filed the case as a constitutional case at the Supreme Court unlawfully. He stated that the case did not meet the conditions necessary to be filed directly at the apex court.
Hence, he requested the court to rule against nullifying the Presidential Election.
The first hearing of the case, which is presided by Chief Justice Dr. Ahmed Abdulla Didi and the full bench of the Supreme Court, was concluded late in the afternoon. The court has scheduled the second hearing of the case for 10:00 a.m. Monday morning.
President Abdulla Yameen was represented at the court by his legal team, former High Court judge Abbas Shareef and Mohamed Saleem (Reynis). The latter is also the president's representative on the Judicial Service Commission.
Meanwhile, the Supreme Court has also allowed the opposition coalition to intervene in the case.
Sign In
