K. Male'
|
09 Apr 2025 | Wed 16:35
Justice Dr. Azmiralda (R) and ACC President Shamil (L)
Justice Dr. Azmiralda (R) and ACC President Shamil (L)
RaajjeMV
Shamil’s false testimony
MPS opposes probe into Shamil’s alleged false testimony
Dr. Azmiralda sought a criminal investigation against Shamil, alleging that he provided false information by sending a letter to JSC
ACC had not initiated any such investigation
Azmiralda filed a case with the police on April 6

The Maldives Police Service (MPS) has stated that they will not investigate the case filed by Supreme Court Judge Dr. Azmiralda Zahir, alleging that Adam Shamil, the President of the Anti-Corruption Commission (ACC), provided false information about her.

Supreme Court Judge Dr. Azmiralda Zahir filed a case with the police on April 6, requesting a criminal investigation into ACC’s President.

Dr. Azmiralda sought a criminal investigation against Shamil, alleging that he provided false information by sending a letter to the Judicial Service Commission (JSC) claiming that a criminal investigation was being conducted on the judge, even though the ACC had not initiated any such investigation. In addition to this, she has requested a criminal investigation into a case where attempts were allegedly made to influence Judge Azmiralda. The police responded to both cases on Tuesday.

In their response, the police stated that regarding the case filed on April 6 under the title "Providing false information by the Anti-Corruption Commission," the matters described in the letter cannot be determined as a criminal offense as claimed by the accuser until the receiving authority, the JSC, evaluates and decides on the information. Therefore, they have decided not to proceed with the investigation under Article 26(a)(3) of the Criminal Procedure Act.

Further, regarding the complaint filed on April 6 under the title "Attempting to influence a judge and efforts to halt the Supreme Court by disregarding the law," the police stated that there are no reasonable grounds to believe that the described actions constitute a criminal offense. Therefore, they have decided not to proceed with the investigation under Article 26(a)(3) of the Criminal Procedure Act.

- comment