The emergency motion submitted to the People’s Majlis expressing concern over the government's efforts to influence the judiciary by imposing restrictions on the judicial branch and suspending three Supreme Court justices of the Maldives, has been rejected.

The motion was submitted to the parliament by Dr. Ahmed Shamheed, MP for South Hulhumalé constituency.

11 lawmakers voted in favor of accepting the emergency motion. 58 lawmakers voted to reject the motion.

The emergency motion urged the government and all state institutions to cease all activities that utilize state institutions in ways that violate fundamental rights and freedoms of citizens, undermine the independence of the judiciary, and create additional burdens for citizens in accessing justice, while condemning such autocratic actions being carried out with government involvement.

While a case has been submitted to the Supreme Court of Maldives regarding the constitutionality of the changes made to Article 73 of the Constitution of the Republic of Maldives under Law No. 25/2024 (Sixth Amendment to the Constitution), which stipulates that Members of Parliament shall lose their seats if they change their political party or are dismissed from their political party, it has been noted in the case that the Attorney General's Office has argued before the court that the Supreme Court lacks jurisdiction to hear this case, effectively attempting to prevent the court from reviewing the matter.

However, when the Supreme Court of Maldives' panel of justices decided to review the case on its merits and accepted it for hearing, Dr. Shamheed said rumors spread about disciplinary proceedings being initiated against the justices as a means of intimidation and influence, and that the government was working to dismiss the justices from their positions.

In addition to this, the lawmaker also noted that MP for Holhudhoo constituency Abdul Sattar Mohamed of the People's National Congress (PNC), during the sitting held on 23 February 2025, submitted and passed a bill to amend Law No. 2010/22 (Courts Act of Maldives) to reduce the number of Supreme Court justices and determine that two out of the seven justices are unqualified for their positions.

He expressed concern over the suspension of justices while preparations were underway for a Supreme Court hearing scheduled for 26 February 2025, regarding the case submitted concerning the Sixth Amendment to the Constitution. Dr. Shamheed also stated that it was clearly evident that the suspension of three Supreme Court justices was intended to obstruct and prevent the proceedings of that case.

Therefore, whether it is a private individual or a person in charge of running a state matter, attempting to interfere with or influence the work of justices is explicitly prohibited under Article 141 (c) of the Constitution, as stated in that case. Dr. Shamheed also highlighted that according to Article 142 of the Constitution, the judges of the Maldives are required to act independently, without bias towards any party, without fear of intimidation from any side, free from all prejudices, and in accordance with the Constitution and law.

Dr. Shamheed has stressed that while the Supreme Court of Maldives was reviewing a sensitive case related to the Sixth Amendment to the Constitution, attempting to change the composition of the court, creating non-existent ethical issues, and removing justices from their judicial duties appears to be an act intended to influence the case being reviewed by the Supreme Court.

While matters requiring advisory opinions from the parliament on important questions regarding legal provisions, constitutional issues, matters of public interest, verification of qualifications of parliamentary candidates, determination of parliamentary member dismissals, and assessment of vacant parliamentary seats must be heard by a bench of five justices, following the removal of three justices from office among the seven justices of the Supreme Court, the motion notes that there is currently no way to proceed with any such cases in the Supreme Court of Maldives.

Similarly, while the Constitution establishes a system of separation of powers, the ruling states that a constitutional void has emerged in the Maldives due to the court being paralyzed in a way that prevents it from fulfilling its responsibilities entrusted by the Constitution for the administration of justice.

While presenting the emergency motion Dr. Shamheed also noted that while no party has the authority to take action against justices in a manner that undermines the power of the Constitution, violates the principles and standards set in the Constitution, and disregards the procedures established in the Judicial Service Commission Act, and furthermore, Article 268 of the Constitution clearly stipulates that any action taken in violation of the Constitution shall be void.

While viewing that exerting influence on judges of courts established under the Constitution as an independent power of the judiciary, obstructing judges' work, and halting the functioning of the Supreme Court of Maldives as unconstitutional acts, he also stated that as a result, the Supreme Court of Maldives is currently unable to independently and continuously adjudicate cases related to public interest and the people's rights.