Emergency motion alleging govt influence over judiciary rejected

The ruling People’s National Congress (PNC) used its supermajority in the Parliament on Tuesday to reject an emergency motion submitted by a politician from the main opposition Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) accusing the government of engaging in efforts to influence the judiciary.

The emergency motion was submitted on Tuesday morning by South Hulhumale’ MP Dr. Ahmed Shamheed.

The motion was rejected with a majority vote of 46-11. One abstained.

The Parliament last week passed a controversial government bill to downsize the Supreme Court’s bench from seven to five justices.

The amendment was passed on February 26 after three parliamentarians from the MDP were kicked out of the chamber ahead of the voting as they  protested against the legislature as well as the decision to ignore concerns raised by the Parliament's Counsel General Fathimath Filza regarding the bill.

It followed weekslong allegations by the MDP that the government was seeking to dismiss some of the members of the top court’s bench to influence a case challenging a contentious amendment to add anti-defection provisions to the Constitution.

The constitutional amendment in question was submitted, passed and ratified in quick succession on November 20. The controversial amendment added three more circumstances where parliamentarians will lose their seat, including if they are expelled from their political party.

Former Kendhoo MP Ali Hussain, an attorney-at-law, filed a constitutional case with the top court on November 24, arguing that the amendment violates key provisions of the Constitution, as well as the basic structure doctrine.

Hearings in the case began on February 17 – nearly three months after the case was filed. The state filed a motion to have the case tossed out, arguing that the Supreme Court does not have the jurisdiction to hear it. But the bench decided on February 18 to proceed with the case, and gave the state 10 days to build their case.

The rushed passage of the judicature billl last week less than one hour ahead of a hearing scheduled at the Supreme Court regarding a request for an injunction to suspend the enforcement of the anti-defection clauses.

But shortly before the hearing had been set to begin at 11:00 am, the Judicial Service Commission (JSC) announced that three Supreme Court justices – Husnu Al-Suood, Dr. Azmiralda Zahir and Mahaz Ali Zahir – had been suspended in light of criminal investigations against them by the Anti-Corruption Commission (ACC).

In his motion, Shamheed accused the government of intimidating the Supreme Court justices in order to sway the verdict in the constitutional case.

He stressed that Supreme Court justices are required to operate with impartiality and free of any and all bias, without fear of any possible act of coercion or intimidation, and with strict adherence to the Maldivian Constitution and laws.

“Attempting to change the composition of the Supreme Court in the middle of such a critical case and suspending the court’s justices by manufacturing non-existent misconduct allegations is an act carried out with the clear intention of influencing the cases being heard by the court,” alleged Shamheed.

He described the move to suspend three out of seven Supreme Court justices – despite the fact that the law requires constitutional cases to be heard by a bench of five – as an act that puts padlocks on the court and leaves it powerless and unable to perform its legally-mandated duties.

Shamheed said it also creates a “constitutional vacuum.”

He condemned “all efforts carried out with the involvement of the government that undermine the fundamental rights and freedoms afforded to the people” and called on the government and all state institutions to stop efforts to “subvert judicial independence and impose additional hardships on the people in their path to achieving justice.”

The emergency motion came shortly after Suood tendered his resignation from the Supreme Court. In his resignation letter, Suood raised serious allegations of government intimidation.

The amendment to the Judicature Act requires JSC to determine two justices to be incompetent and submit their names to the Parliament within five days the legislature takes effect. And the Parliament is required to make a decision regarding their removal within seven days.

Opposition parties, including the MDP and the Democrats, questioned the timing of the bill, and accused the government of attempting to influence the country's highest judicial authority and subvert judicial independence.

Meanwhile, the Bar Council called it an "unconstitutional amendment that interferes in and influences justices."

The council stressed that the Constitution is clear that Supreme Court justices may only be removed through the Parliament, and only if the JSC find them guilty of misconduct.

The ACC has declined to disclose any details regarding the investigation against the Supreme Court justices, saying only that it followed criminal complaints against the trio.

Ali Hussain alleges the cases against them were “manufactured” to block his constitution case – which is now stymied.

The emergency motion came shortly after Suood tendered his resignation from the Supreme Court. In his resignation letter, Suood raised serious allegations of government intimidation.