Shaheed’s Row with Mundhu

22 December 2007

Shaheed’s Row with Mundhu

I never spoke publicly about Mohamed Hussain Shareef or Mundhu. Everyone who knows both of us would also know perhaps that we have not necessarily had very warm relations. I cannot recall any specific reason for that state of affairs. All I could say is that our relations have always been at the level it necessitated to be, professionally speaking. But I have read with great interest the media stories about the argument Mundhu had with Dr Ahmed Shaheed over the latter’s premature release of findings of Hussain Solah’s autopsy report to the media. I could not wait but come out and lend support to Mundhu. He is right cent per cent.

Often, I had written or spoken about the difficulties I faced because of Dr Ahmed Shaheed’s excessive relationship with the media. I had spoken about having had to change government positions on several occasions due to his inordinate briefings to the media. However, I did not give many examples. The one talked about by Mundhu now is one classical case in point.

I was closely involved in the developing story of Hussain Solah’s post mortem and matters surrounding the discovery of his corpse. The President, Dr Ahmed Shaheed, and Mundhu were in Singapore. Ahmed Thasmeen Ali, Dr Hassan Saeed and I were dealing with the issue here in Male’ along with few other cabinet ministers.

During the many discussions we had in person or over the telephone during that extremely tense situation, Dr Saeed, Thasmeen and I had repeatedly expressed our anger over Dr Ahmed Shaheed’s zealous relationship with the media during those crucial days.

Decisions regarding government positions in that case were taken by a committee of cabinet ministers. If Dr Ahmed Shaheed were in Male’ he would have attended the meetings of that committee. He would know which I committee I am talking about. Therefore, as and when we faced an issue or made a decision, Dr Ahmed Shaheed was briefed as a matter of protocol. However, what we disliked was Dr Shaheed’s relaying of information to the media in relation to decisions reached in the meetings without Thasmeen’s knowledge or approval. Thasmeen was for all purposes the relevant minister. He was in base leading the operations.

Three incidents come to my mind involving Dr Shaheed’s collision with the committee as regards media statements he made over events surrounding the death of Hussain Solah.

Firstly, Anni was detained due to the chaos that occurred around the cemetery. The detention was meant to be brief and only meant to ease the commotion and enforce peace in the vicinity. Dr Shaheed was reported in the Minivan News website to say that Anni would be released shortly. That killed the purpose of detaining Anni. We were unhappy with his statement.

Secondly, Solah’s parents wanted to take him overseas for a post mortem at their expense. We decided that Solah’s body was the subject of a criminal investigation and could not be released to the family. The government would however arrange the body to be taken for a post mortem overseas at its cost if the family insisted on doing it overseas. There was a slight difference between the choice of the family and the position of the government. Family wanted the post mortem to happen overseas at their own expense. Government wanted to do it overseas in the presence of the family but at the expense of the Government. However, Dr Shaheed was reported to have broken the news that the Government had agreed to allow post mortem on Hussain Solah’s body as wanted by the parents. We had to change position because of that statement. We were frustrated with that statement.

Thirdly, issue arose over the release of findings of the post mortem report. We knew a little while before the news hit the media about the report and its findings. Naturally, it was a nervous wait for all of us, like having sat for a final exam, results of which were to decide our fate. We were all very relieved with the news. But we agreed not to break the news until the family had been notified and given a copy of the report. Dr Shaheed broke the news to the media and Minivan News made a curious mention in the article that it was Dr Shaheed who personally called them to give the news. It made us furious. There was a huge uproar, naturally, from the family for having broken the story in the media. It gave rise to unnecessary complications.

We took issue with the President. The President finally instructed our High Commission in Colombo to follow the instructions of Thasmeen and not Dr Shaheed in dealing with the body of and matters relating to Hussain Solah.

The President did not authorize Dr Shaheed to release that information to the media. It was agreed to have been released by Thasmeen in a meeting with the press. The President was in constant contact with Thasmeen. I myself was in contact with the President. I was also in contact with Dr Saeed and Thasmeen every step of the way. Finally, Thasmeen, instead of giving a press briefing, gave a brief phone interview to TVM and gave up the idea of making a press statement to the media.

I have offered this explanation to affirm that Mundhu is right in this matter.

I know Dr Shaheed has asserted his truthfulness in the matter. I will narrate a personal experience as regards the truthfulness of Dr Shaheed. Shortly after the commotion in the media about Hill and Knowlton I came across certain sensitive documents incriminating Dr Shaheed. Those documents were in the hands of parliamentarians who were not very sympathetic to Dr Shaheed. I took some pictures of those documents using my mobile phone. I sent an sms shortly afterwards to Dr Shaheed asking him if he had heard of any transaction or project mentioned in those documents. He replied that he had not been aware of anything of that sort and the rumors were all “rubbish”.

Weeks later, the topic came up for discussion between Dr Shaheed and I as his no confidence motion began to gain momentum. I showed him the pictures in my mobile. That was a few days before his resignation. The pressure of the existence of those incriminating materials in unfriendly hands and the impending blow to his reputation and the President’s refusal to intervene at a personal level to save Dr Shaheed were the combined catalyst for his sudden resignation from cabinet. It had nothing to do with the earlier resignation of Dr Saeed or Mr Jameel. It had nothing to do with reform and democracy.

Now, let’s hear Dr Shaheed talk about democracy, transparency and good governance.

Courtesy: mnasheed's blog