Govt. to UN: Justices dismissed for accountability; Supreme Court is not at a standstill

The government has stated that two Supreme Court justices were dismissed to uphold accountability within the constraints of the law, while stressing that the top court will not come to a standstill because of this.

A ruling PNC-dominated Parliament voted to dismiss Supreme Court justices Dr. Azmiralda Zahir and Mahaz Ali Zahir on May 14^th. The two justices were among the three suspended by the Judicial Service Commission (JSC) on February 26^th, the third being Husnu al Suood, citing an ongoing investigation against them by the Anti-Corruption Commission (ACC).

Suood resigned from the top court in protest of JSC’s decision, and the commission later opened misconduct cases against Azmiralda and Mahaz, accusing them of conspiring to influence the Criminal Court judges.

At the time of their suspension, all three justices were hearing a case challenging the controversial move by PNC to write anti-defection clauses into the Maldivian constitution.

While both JSC and ACC investigated cases against all three justices, they raised serious concerns regarding serious infringements of due process, including failure to share information regarding the investigation and being denied the opportunity to present their defense.

Subsequently, Suood filed a complaint regarding the matter with United Nations (UN) and other international organizations including Commonwealth and World Bank.

Both local and international organizations raised concerns over the matter, calling on authorities to allow the justices to present their defense. However, the Parliament’s Judiciary Committee approved the dismissal of the justices without granting them such an opportunity.

On April 17th, Margaret Satterthwaite, the UN Special Rapporteur on the Independence of Judges and Lawyers, issued a statement suggesting that the series of actions appears to be intended to undermine Supreme Court’s judicial review of the controversial amendment. Satterthwaite further said the suspensions, disciplinary proceedings and investigations can amount to interference in the independence of the top court.

She also expressed concern over Azmiralda and Mahaz’s lawyers being denied the opportunity to speak at the disciplinary proceedings which had not been held publicly.

The Maldivian government responded to her statement on April 17^st in which the government stated that Satterthwaite’s statement referred to “several misconstrued facts and baseless allegations”.  The government expressed concern citing that the statement was released based on unverified and unsubstantiated information, moreover, prior to receiving an official response from the government.

The government reiterated its stance three justices were suspended and two were subsequently dismissed in full adherence to due process and in full compliance with the Maldivian constitution, relevant laws, established procedures and international standards.

“This affirmation has been arrived through a thorough examination of the information shared with the Government by the Judicial Service Commission, the Anti-Corruption Commission, and the People’s Majlis, upon request, in preparation to respond to the Communication (Satterthwaite’s statement),” the government said.

The government also defended why Azmiralda was not granted opportunity to present her defense and why the JSC proceedings had been held behind closed doors. In this regard, the government said:

The obligation to respond in investigation against judges vested solely on the judge according to the Judicial Commission Act, although the responding judge may consult their legal counsel when answering questions

JSC decided not to hold open hearings given the e possibility of an open hearing impacting the criminal investigation being undertaken by the ACC, and with consideration for the negative effects an open hearing may have on public perception of, and trust in the judiciary

The government also denied allegations that Attorney General Ahmed Usham threatened Azmiralda.

“The Government has unwaveringly upheld its pledge to respect the rule of law and the supremacy of the Constitution by ensuring zero interference in the Judiciary. At the time of submission of the constitutional case, the Government had been in office for more than a year and had not attempted to alter the composition of the Supreme Court bench, unlike many previous administrations,” the statement read.

The government emphasized that its prompt and appropriate responses to prove judicial misconduct, not only upheld the rights of the public but also reinforced the legitimacy of the judiciary and the broader justice system.

“Upholding accountability within the judiciary is not an attack on its independence. It is a fundamental element of its preservation. A requirement for public trust,” the government added.

Furthermore, the government also denied allegations that the Supreme Court was at a standstill due to the suspension of the justices. In this regard, the government noted that the Supreme Court had concluded and delivered judgements in four cases since February 26^th.

The government has also extended an invitation to Satterthwaite to undertake a visit to the Maldives to visit the Maldives to observe, first-hand, the country’s access to justice framework and the measures in place to safeguard the independence of the judiciary.

Notably, Parliament’s judiciary Committee has approved the appointment of incumbent High Court Judge Mohamed Saleem and former judge Abdulla Hameed for vacancies in the bench of the Supreme Court.