Riffath's no-confidence motion adjourned

The no-confidence motion set against Attorney General Ibrahim Riffath, scheduled for Monday's sitting of the People's Majlis, has been adjourned.

Monday's sitting of the Majlis saw opposition members of the parliament disrupt the sitting and halting the works scheduled for the day. The day's session was adjourned twice.

Attorney General Riffath attended the session to respond to the motion set against him. However, opposition members refused to give him the opportunity to talk and kept interrupting him by takin on points of order.

The Majlis spent an hour without starting the debate on the motion and, even after resuming the session after lunch, members of the opposition and the newly introduced The Democrats, kept repeatedly disrupting the proceedings of the session.

It was not disclosed when the Majlis will schedule the no-confidence motion set against the Attorney General again.

The no-confidence motion against Riffath was submitted to the Majlis on 11 May 2023, with the signatures of 13 members. The debate on the issue was scheduled for the parliament sitting of Wednesday, 31 May 2023.

The main basis for the no-confidence vote against him, according to the opposition was that he acted in a way that is detrimental to Maldives' interests in the Maldives-Mauritius maritime boundary dispute.

The General Committee of the Majlis decided to give Riffath 30 minutes to appeal his case. As such, it was decided to give him 10 minutes before the debate, 10 minutes during the debate and 10 minutes after the debate.

During the sitting on Wednesday, AG Riffath responded to the parliament in writing. This led to a member of parliament to raise a point of order. Speaker of Parliament, Mohamed Nasheed made the decision to accept the point of order and not to proceed with the matter during Wednesday's hearing.

With this, AG Riffath sent a letter addressed to the Speaker of parliament on Thursday. In his letter, the Attorney General noted that he had sent a written defense against the no-confidence motion because the main issue on which the case is based on is a matter of many facts and legal points.

He stated that another reason for submitting a written reply was to clarify that the issue on which his no-confidence motion is based was a misrepresentation of the truth about his conduct in the discharge of his duty to represent the state.

Noting that since he was not given the opportunity to respond in writing at Wednesday's hearing, he requested an audience with the People's Majlis to respond to the no-confidence motion set against him, as per the Constitution, following which the matter was included in Monday's meeting agenda.