The forever accused: when waiting for trial becomes the punishment

The Dhivehi term is prison slang – literally "what is happening" – that has entered the popular lexicon to describe a state of legal limbo that can stretch for years.

"You said you would end it within 100 days. Two years on, it remains exactly where it was,” he told the president, describing the Muizzu administration as a "vaanuvaa government" that had set a "record" for the highest number of pre-trial detentions. 

"A life has been lost due to the president's negligence,” he alleged, referring to the custodial death of Mohamed Jameel, a 45-year-old man who passed away in June 2024.

Muizzu responded by insisting that he has fulfilled the pledge. The government has addressed the root cause: space constraints at the courthouse that created a backlog and caused long delays. The relocation of the criminal court and drug court to a spacious new facility in Hulhumalé last June effectively resolved the longstanding operational challenge, he suggested.   

Muizzu sought to frame vaanuvaa not as indefinite pre-trial detention, but as uncertainty about trial scheduling: "What they call vaanuvaa, that is in the past when you didn't know when a trial would be held, that vaanuvaa – now the court says they are sharing information about scheduling dates and the day for the next [hearing] much better than before."

The government has done its part by ensuring the independence of judiciary with resources and financial autonomy, he contended. "Previously it was locked up. There was no way to work. There was no space to work either. The building was falling on their heads," he said.

The exchange followed weeks of campaigning under the #EndVaanuvaa slogan, featuring a flood of social media posts, graffiti spray-painted across Malé, podcasts about individual cases, and testimonials from children who have never known their detained fathers. 

The president went on to provide a detailed breakdown of the cases of 347 people currently in vaanuvaa detention. They include 117 accused of child sexual abuse, 116 of drug trafficking, 70 of assault, 29 of murder, and 20 of terrorism-related offences. The other cases involved money laundering, theft, robbery at knifepoint, domestic violence, kidnapping, human trafficking, homosexuality, arson, prostitution, and smuggling.

"Would the Maldivian people want me to release these people out on the streets within five minutes?" he asked, drawing cries of "no" from the crowd. Muizzu said he did not have "the right or the opportunity" to release such detainees. "It's not something I should do either," he added. 

Muizzu's remarks represented a sharp reversal from assurances offered during a meeting in May, Ismail Rasheed, chairman of the Maldives Human Rights and Detainee Watch (MHRDW), told the Maldives Independent.

When advocates for ending vaanuvaa presented proposals at the meeting, including electronic monitoring and conditional release, the president committed to looking into cases of detainees who could be released, he said. 

But Muizzu's statement at the community meeting was "very different" from the private meeting in May.

"At the Maafannu meeting, the president said vaanuvaa has now been solved. No one would want to release someone involved with children or terrorism cases. And there's nothing more to consider beyond that," Rasheed said.

"Earlier he mentioned tagging, monitoring, releasing people who can be released. On the other hand, the president's election promise was to abolish vaanuvaa....The president's election promise was 'release or charge.' He also said he would abolish vaanuvaa completely, the president said he would abolish the system." 

MHRDW rejected his reframing of vaanuvaa as uncertainty about trial dates. In a press release following the town hall, the NGO called on the Prosecutor General's Office to act on pre-trial releases and reiterated its call for electronic monitoring.

Under the Criminal Procedure Act, individuals accused of serious offences may be detained until the end of their trials. For crimes under special laws – terrorism, gang violence, sexual offences involving minors – there is no requirement for periodic remand review.

According to data obtained by Detainee Watch from the prisons authority, more than 70 percent of suspects in vaanuvaa detention had been under custody more than a year as of November 16, including one person jailed for 12 years. Two individuals have been held for over nine years. Another two have been detained for more than seven years. The organisation estimates vaanuvaa detainees comprise roughly 30 percent of the total prison population.

"Indefinite detention by itself would amount to violations under the Convention Against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman and Degrading Treatment or Punishment – which is enforced through the Anti-Torture Act of the Maldives," Shahindha Ismail, executive director of the Maldivian Democracy Network, told the Maldives Independent.

What makes vaanuvaa particularly troubling, Shahindha argued, is that it is "sanctioned by the courts. It is in fact ordered by a judge."

Articles 42, 50, and 51 of the constitution require that investigations and court proceedings be conducted "at adequate speed." Justice cannot be delayed. Extension of detention is permitted only under specific circumstances. Insufficient judges or courtrooms are not among them, she said.

"I think justice itself is in vaanuvaa now," she said. "From the moment suspicion arises, everyone sees them as guilty."

Over the past months, MHRDW, which has about 10 active members, emerged as the primary advocate for vaanuvaa reform. The organisation registered in 2022, though its work began earlier.

"This work started because there has always been a culture in the Maldives of making things hard for people who are already experiencing hardship," said Rasheed, the organisation's chairman. "And we ourselves experienced various situations."

In the group's assessment of responsibility, everyone shares the blame.

"The police proceed based on intelligence reports. The courts are at the same level. The prosecutor is at the same level. No one questions anyone else," Rasheed said. "From the moment suspicion arises, all bodies see them as definitely a criminal."

According to the group, in some cases, suspects are held on intelligence reports alone – classified documents that "two or three people can fabricate." Such reports are not disclosed to defence lawyers. 

"Even a very good person can be taken to vaanuvaa based only on an intelligence report," Rasheed said.

Certain actors benefit from maintaining a large prison population, he alleged, referring to prison officials and related business deals, such as catering contracts. 

"Vaanuvaa seems like keeping people detained as a warning, so that someone else knows vaanuvaa can happen to them," he suggested. "When you look, the lowest class, the poorest families are locked in vaanuvaa."

Mohamed Hameed, who served as police commissioner from 2018 to 2023, characterised vaanuvaa as a "collective system issue" that stemmed from "practices and culture in the judiciary" coupled with inefficiencies in investigation and prosecution.

Routine requests from police for maximum remand periods are not justified, he acknowledged. "It has to be more individual case-based," he told the Maldives Independent.

Hameed drew a distinction between police remand – which has statutory time limits, even for terrorism cases – and judicial remand, which can extend indefinitely. The latter reflects deeper dysfunction, he argued.

"Police do tend to request to keep them," he said. "But it is for the judiciary to decide."

During his tenure, Hameed said, police worked with the Attorney General's Office and PG office to reduce remand cases. "We held multiple meetings with the courts." While there were guidelines from the PG office, a clearer protocol establishing thresholds for when to seek judicial remand, or for how long, could have helped, he conceded. 

Asked where the system breaks down, Hameed pointed to cancelled hearings and the cascade of problems that follow: witness intimidation, corruption, and interference with the judiciary.

"It's a system inefficiency," he said. "Years of culture across the criminal justice sector."

MDN's Shahindha rejected the notion that vaanuvaa persists due to resource constraints.

"I am aware that the courts have been saying for years that there is a problem of resources – this problem of resources only seems to affect the speed of justice," she said. "I don't believe it is a problem related to resources alone. I think it has more to do with corruption, incompetency, political influence, and total impunity of judges."

She pointed to court conduct: cases that take months or years to schedule, only to be cancelled at the last minute because a judge is on leave. "How hard is it to schedule a hearing that does not conflict with annual leave of judges? In other cases, the judge simply may not show up."

Shahindha blamed the alleged politicisation of the judiciary, citing the case of Maldives Independent (formerly Minivan News) journalist Ahmed Rilwan Abdullah, who was forcibly disappeared in August 2014.

"Ahmed Muaz, Ahmed Ismail and Ismail Abdul Raheem, who were arrested in connection to the case and that of the murder of Yameen Rasheed, were released despite charges of terrorism," she said. "The Prosecutor General refused to appeal the release. President Muizzu then rewarded Abdul Raheem with a political position."

Such decisions "certainly do not appear to be related to a lack of resources," she said.

The Association for Democracy in the Maldives has compiled a list of serious cases where the PG office refused to appeal or charge. This was evidence, Shahindha argued, that "release or not release of detainees is totally political and corrupt."

Electronic monitoring has been the most commonly proposed alternative to indefinite detention. In May, the PG office announced a review of cases to release suspects with ankle devices and court-ordered conditions. Police and corrections will assess public safety risks to determine the level of monitoring required, it said at the time.

Former commissioner Hameed suggested it was "workable, especially in our society" with geofencing and restricting movement to certain areas.

"It is a proven and effective method to manage high-profile offenders who are on trial, making sure that they are not a flight risk, making sure that they do not come into contact with any witness, they do not interfere with any judge or intimidate anyone," he said.

But he cautioned that it would be expensive and resource-intensive: "Given the weakness of the system, I think it's still going to be a challenge."

Shahindha was more skeptical.

"I do believe there may be instances where it can be useful, but I find some concerns around it," she said. "For one, it impacts the dignity of the person who is made to wear it – it stands out and is easily associated with 'criminals' even if the person is not convicted."

More fundamentally, electronic monitoring does not address the underlying problem: "I don't think EMDs address the problem of delayed justice, which is the main issue we are discussing. I think the root problem that needs to be tackled is what is causing the delays in justice."

She also raised safety concerns: "Some of the people who are held in pretrial detention are people alleged of serious crimes and who could become harmful if they are released from state custody. There has been an incident where such a release has led to another murder."

At a press briefing on Thursday, Homeland Security Minister Ali Ihusan suggested that releasing suspects after a review was not straightforward. He offered the hypothetical case of a drug trafficking defendant as an example. Even if the review determines that the person could be released during trial, "if that person is someone who could pose a danger to society in many other cases [involving the same suspect], that consideration will come during the police review." 

Out of 103 suspects assessed under the electronic monitoring system, only 10 were released as of November. 

The consequences of vaanuvaa extend beyond the detained individual. Families lose breadwinners. Children grow up with absent parents. When cases finally conclude, there is no compensation after acquittals, and no system for reintegration.

"There's no such system set up in the Maldives. There's some way to compensate but there's nothing much done about it, so these things don't move forward," Rasheed, the MHRDW chairman, said. "Even in the latest news, there's talk of building a prison for 3,000 people. No government is thinking about how the number of these people could be reduced."

Shahindha noted that vaanuvaa is not limited to pre-trial detainees. "It is also experienced by people who are on death row," she said. "As far as they know, the court has sentenced them to death. They are not informed of what the process is, whether there is a moratorium in place, or whether they are going to be executed. This treatment clearly falls under torture."

She also highlighted the plight of migrant workers held in similar conditions: "some of the most marginalised people in the Maldives, often with no one to advocate on their behalf."

The physical conditions of detention compound the problem. A Prisons Audit Commission under the previous administration made over 180 recommendations to reform prison and detention conditions.

"I am not aware of even one percent of those recommendations having been implemented," Shahindha said.

MHRDW's prescription is simple: speed up trials, and hire more staff if necessary.

"Evidence is being lost because of delays. Evidence is being influenced. Cases drag on. Some don't finish before governments change – and then people get released anyway," Rasheed said.

For the Detainee Watch group, the more fundamental point is one of principle.

"If there's evidence, shouldn't they be convicted quickly? If it's very serious, that's why they're arrested. So look into whether they can be convicted quickly," Rasheed said. "The state's incapability to convict someone is not a reason for their human dignity to be violated."

Former commissioner Hameed called for "criminal justice oversight" – monitoring the judiciary as well as prosecution and investigation performance. "It has to be framed as criminal justice oversight," he said. "Not just judicial oversight."

Shahindha pointed to the criminal procedure code itself: "Do the laws prescribe adequate timeframes for investigations and judicial processes in all courts, including civil, family, and drug courts? I don't think so, and I think these processes should be specified."

More fundamentally, she said, the judiciary needs effective oversight. "Why is there a never-ending backlog at courts? Why is it so common to cancel scheduled hearings at the last minute? Are delays caused by delays in investigations or prosecution? The answers to these questions, backed by evidence, may be a good place to start."

At today's press conference, Ihusan doubled down on the president's stance: inadequate infrastructure was the main factor that impeded the proper functioning of the criminal justice system, a problem that he suggested has now largely been solved. Since the opening of the Hulhumalé complex, "the process through the courts is going very smoothly, very fast.”

The criminal court has since informed the government that the backlog could be cleared in the next year and a half, the home minister said.

“So with the will of God, we will solve this problem called vaanuvaa during this term," he said.