Confusion has reigned supreme, following the decision issued by Supreme Court over the case filed by four Members of Parliament, following Elections Commission (EC) decision to strip them from their seats.

The decision issued by Supreme Court on Sunday stated that the ruling issued by the Court on July 13th, was applicable to the events that followed 13th July 2017. It added the court order was clear on the verdict. Supreme Court ruling added that instead of decreeing a ruling in the status of the Members, the previous ruling was specific that all decisions were relevant following the date in the verdict.

It also said the previous verdict had clearly specified on how a Parliamentarian can lose his or her seat and therefore there was no room to create doubt on legality of those Parliamentarians ability to serve as MPs.

It said the Supreme Court rulings on floor crossing had provided an adequate legal solution to the issue. It further noted that clause 145 (c) of the Constitution, was clear on the interpretation of the law and as the Supreme Court was the final authority on legal matters as well the Constitution, laws, rules and regulations, the Supreme Court reserved the right to make the final judgment on the issue.

The Supreme Court decision stated that there was no room to make an additional decision on the issue. Therefore, referring to clauses 145 (c), 299 (a) and 268 of the Constitution, the Justices of Supreme Court decreed that under clause 74 of the Constitution there was no room to make additional clarifications or interpretations on the case.

The cases were filed by Thulusdhoo Constituency MP Mohamed Waheed Ibrahim, Vilingili Constituency MP Saud Hussain, Maduvvari Constituency MP Mohamed Ameeth and Dhihdhoo Constituency MP Abdul Latheef Mohamed, after EC stripped them from their Parliament seats, following the Supreme Court verdict on floor crossing.

The MPs had filed case requesting to nullify the decision made by EC, issue an order that allowed MPs to fulfill their legal mandate and issue a stay order on the by-elections announced by EC.

The ruling was issued not a Supreme Court session but rather lawyers were summoned to Court a little after sunset, to handover the verdict.