Judge Azmiralda requests criminal investigation into ACC Pres.

K. Male'

06 Apr 2025 | Sun 16:49

Adam Shamil, the President of the Anti-Corruption Commission (ACC)

RaajjeMV

Criminal probe against Shamil

Judge Azmiralda requests criminal investigation into ACC Pres.

Shameel highlighted that they have submitted a written response to the investigative report on the disciplinary case being investigated by JSC against Judge Azmiralda

Judge Azmiralda’s legal counsel Ibrahim Shameel revealed that the judge filed a complaint with the police institution on Sunday

This is based on the allegations that Shamil provided false information to JSC by sending a letter claiming that a criminal investigation was being conducted against the judge

Zunana Zalif

2,982

Supreme Court Judge Dr. Azmiralda Zahir has submitted a case to the Maldives Police Service (MPS), requesting a criminal investigation into Adam Shamil, the President of the Anti-Corruption Commission (ACC).

Speaking to RaajjeMV, Judge Azmiralda’s legal counsel Ibrahim Shameel revealed that the judge filed a complaint with the police institution on Sunday, requesting a criminal investigation into Shamil. This is based on the allegations that Shamil provided false information to the Judicial Service Commission (JSC) by sending a letter claiming that a criminal investigation was being conducted against the judge, even though the ACC had not initiated any such investigation. Shameel also stated that they have requested a criminal investigation into the matter of attempting to influence Judge Azmiralda.

In addition to this, Shameel highlighted that they have submitted a written response to the investigative report on the disciplinary case being investigated by JSC against Judge Azmiralda, specifically regarding the allegation of influencing Criminal Court judges.

The main points highlighted in the judges' response are:

The decision to investigate the case was made in violation of procedures.
The decision to investigate was made in violation of the commission's own procedures for initiating cases.
The investigation was conducted in violation of the Constitution and laws.
The commission has obstructed the right to respond and defend, and there have been obstacles in submitting procedural matters related to this.
The decision not to hold the committee meeting open to the public was made without legal basis.
The committee report has noted things contrary to the truth.
The investigation is being conducted without any basis for examining the case and with ill intent.
There is no situation where any of the articles cited as violations of the code of conduct apply to this case.
In the response submitted to the Judicial Service Commission by the judge, 17 pieces of documentary evidence and 11 testimonial statements have been presented to support the points the judge wishes to establish. The judge has also requested that the presented witnesses be summoned to give testimony.
Noting that this is a case being investigated without basis, the judge has requested that it be declared that the case is not proven.

On 26 February 2025, while the Supreme Court was considering the case of the amendment that would result in lawmakers losing their seats if they leave or are expelled from their party, the JSC abruptly suspended three Supreme Court judges.

The judges suspended, citing an ongoing ACC investigation, were Husnu al Suood, Mahaz Ali Zahir, and Dr. Azmiralda. On 4 March 2025, Judge Suood resigned, stating that President Dr. Mohamed Muizzu had violated the Constitution. Subsequently, on 19 March 2025, High Court Chief Judge Hussain Shaheed was appointed to the position of Supreme Court Justice.

Many people continue to claim that the suspension of Judges Mahaz and Dr. Azmiralda was done to influence the Supreme Court. This is suspected to be an attempt to halt the case submitted to the Supreme Court to nullify the constitutional amendment that will result in lawmakers losing their seats for floor crossing.

Ali Hussain, lawyer and former MP for Kendhoo constituency who filed the case, has also expressed concern. Both the largest opposition party, the Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP), and The Democrats have intervened in the case filed by Ali Hussain.

The case argues that the amendment causing lawmakers to lose their seats when changing parties was brought in violation of Articles 4, 8, 26, 75, and 90 of the Constitution. It also claims that this change is directly contrary to the framework of the Constitution.

Although one hearing for the case challenging the constitutional amendment was held on 17 February 2025, no further hearings have been conducted since then.

Since the case is set to be heard by a bench of seven judges, and two judges have been suspended, it is now impossible to proceed with the hearings in the case.