No confidence motion filed against AG Riffath

Attorney General Ibrahim Riffath. (File Photo/Sun)

A parliamentary no-confidence motion has been filed against Attorney General Ibrahim Riffath which claims he had acted in violation of Maldivian citizens’ interest with respect to the maritime border dispute between the Maldives and Maurtitius reviewed by the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea (ITLOS).

The no-confidence motion was filed by an opposition alliance which comprises of the opposition PPM-PNC coalition, ‘Fikuregge Dhurin’, headed by MDP’s leader, Parliament Speaker Mohamed Nasheed, Jumhoory Party and Maldives National Party.

Speaking during a press conference held by the alliance on Thursday, PNC’s Deputy Leader, Maduvvari MP Adam Shareef cited negligence in advocating for Maldives’ Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) and compensation in huge amounts to third parties by the government in a manner that is detrimental to Maldivian citizens as reasons the no-confidence motion has been initiated.

He noted that they are also pursuing no-confidence motions against President Ibrahim Mohamed Solih and Foreign Minister Abdulla Shahid.

Speaking at the press conference, Jumhoory Party member Ali Hussain said that despite Maldivian constitution setting down the nation’s EEZ, Riffath, in the case, had argued to protect the interests of another party. He stressed there is no greater betrayal than letting go of something Maldivians are entitled to.

Two-third of the parliament members must vote in favor of passing the no-confidence motion in order to dismiss a minister. That is 43 members out of the 87 members.

There is a total of 24 parliamentarians in the opposition alliance; 12 members from Fikuregge Dhirun, seven members from opposition PPM-PNC coalition, three members for Jumhoory Party and three members from MNP.

ITLOS, on April 28th, concluded that the conflicting Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) between Mauritius and Maldives will be divided between the two using the equidistance formula as argued by Maldives in the case.

Thus, Maldives gains 47,232 square kilometers from the 95,563 square kilometers of maritime territory in dispute while Mauritius gains 45,331 square kilometers.

Opposition parties claim Maldives is entitled to the 95,563 square kilometers of maritime territory in dispute.