MDP legal team alleges political interference in verdict against ex-Fenaka MD
MDP's legal team criticizes a recent verdict against former Fenaka MD Saeed as politically motivated and selectively enforced
MDP Legal Committee Member Al-Ustaz Ahmed Mauroof
The legal team of the main opposition Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) has sharply criticized the recent verdict issued against Ahmed Saeed Mohamed, the former Managing Director of Fenaka Corporation, calling it a politically motivated and selectively enforced judgment.
The team has alleged that the ruling was orchestrated to target specific individuals affiliated with the opposition.
At a press conference held on Monday, MDP lawyer Ahmed Maaroof raised serious concerns about the irregular manner in which Saeed’s case was handled in comparison to similar cases.
According to the legal team, while numerous cases forwarded to the courts by the Prosecutor General’s Office (PG Office) have stagnated at various procedural stages, Saeed’s case, which was filed much later, was fast-tracked through the judicial system, culminating in a swift sentencing.
The legal team characterized this disparity as deliberate and politically timed. They argued that the unusually rapid proceedings suggest an attempt to deliver a high-profile verdict against a figure associated with the MDP, possibly timed to serve a broader political agenda.
The team claimed that this points to direct executive influence over the judiciary, describing the outcome as effectively a verdict handed down by the president himself.
MDP’s legal team has also accused the government of selectively pursuing legal action, pointing to cases involving individuals close to the current administration that have failed to progress.
One example highlighted was the controversial lease of the Malé Fish Market during President Dr. Mohamed Muizzu’s tenure as Malé City Mayor.
According to the legal team, efforts to bring this case forward have been deliberately obstructed, with Malé City Council meetings to discuss the matter failing to reach quorum, allegedly due to the council’s proximity to the president.
The team argued that this selective enforcement of justice reflects a broader pattern of political interference in the judiciary.
They emphasized that while cases involving opposition members are expedited and result in severe sentences, similar or more serious allegations linked to government figures remain untouched.
On Sunday, the Criminal Court sentenced Saeed to four years in prison, significantly exceeding the one year and seven months recommended by the state. Saeed had served as Fenaka’s Managing Director under the MDP-led administration.
The case has sparked fresh concerns about the independence of the judiciary and the extent to which political considerations are influencing legal proceedings in the Maldives.
