Advertisement

Parliament votes to charge ex-Minister Ameen for ethics violation

Health Minister Abdulla Ameen during a meeting with the Parliament's Public Accounts Committee on August 25, 2020. (Sun Photo/Fayaz Moosa)

The Parliament has voted for charges to be brought forth in the case of former Health Minister Abdulla Ameen misleading the parliament regarding the procurement of ventilators to the Maldives.

The Parliament voted on the Ethics Committee report which found that Ameen had violated the ethics of the parliament when he made statements contradictory with the findings of an audit report.

A total of 57 parliamentarians voted to send the case for charges to be brought forth. 

Ameen has previously denied that he misled the parliament. The Committee report into the matter read that there were no contradictions between the answers provided by the Health Ministry in response to a letter by MP for South Mahchangoalhi Ahmed Haitham to obtain information on April 28, 2020, and the statements by Ameen in the parliament on October 20. 

However, the report noted that there were contradictions between the statements by Minister Ameen in the parliament and the findings of the Auditor-General Report. 

The Committee report read that despite Ameen stating that official communications between the Health Ministry and the WHO had been conducted regarding the work to procure ventilators, and the presentation of an email for the purpose, it could not be determined that the email proved communications between a Ministry employee or a linked party. 

The Committee unanimously found that Ameen had purposefully misled the parliament which was an ethics violation. The report is to be discussed in the parliament session scheduled for today. 

Ameen had stated that official communications had been conducted with WHO regarding the procurement of ventilators and that Executors General Trading was a company recommended by the WHO, a statement the Audit Report did not corroborate based on findings. 

The Anti-Corruption Commission which had investigated the case had requested charges to be brought forth in the case, only for the PG to decide against doing so due to a lack of evidence sufficient for a conviction.

Advertisement
Comment