Committee votes to recommend review of ventilator corruption case

Parliament’s Judiciary Committee has voted in favor of recommending the Prosecutor General’s Office to reconsider its decision not to pursue corruption charges against Health Ministry officials in connection to a contract to procure ventilators.

A compliance audit released by the Auditor General’s Office in August had uncovered irregularities in COVID-19 related spending by the Health Ministry - primarily with regard to a MVR 34.50 million contract to Dubai-based Executors General Trading to procure 75 ventilators – prompting a joint investigation by the ACC and Maldives Police Service.

The ACC completed the investigation and requested the Prosecutor General’s Office for corruption charges against 11 Health Ministry officials in connection to the ventilator contract, including Abdulla Ameen, who recently resigned as Health Minister in face of the allegations.

However, the Prosecutor General’s Office announced its decision to decline charges against the officials on October 20, citing lack of sufficient evidence to prove the charges.

Prosecutor General Hussain Shameem was summoned to the Judiciary Committee for questioning in connection to the decision on October 28. However, the meeting was held behind closed doors.

The Judiciary Committee has completed its inquiry and passed its report, which includes three recommendations.

The Judiciary Committee wrote in the report that they had decided against including detailed information pertaining to the case in the report, citing that documents shared by the Prosecutor General’s Office as well as the information shared by PG Shameem in connection to the case were confidential information, and that the public release of the information may obstruct or influence future action in connection to the case.

The Judiciary Committee, based on the reasons cited by the Prosecutor General’s Office for the decision to decline charges and information shared by PG Shameem, voted in favor of making three recommendations to the Prosecutor General’s Office.

RECOMMENDATIONS:

• Recommendation to the Prosecutor General’s Office to obtain additional information linked with the case from investigative agencies.
• Recommendation to the Prosecutor General’s Officeto implement the first recommendation, and review the case.
• Recommendation to the Prosecutor General’s Office to share its decision regarding review of the case with the Judiciary Committee.

ACC rejects the assertion that there was a lack of evidence in the case, and requested the Prosecutor General’s Office for a review of the case on October 25.