Emergency motion over alleged intimidation and obstruction of journalists rejected!
The Parliament has rejected an emergency motion submitted by MP Meekail Ahmed Naseem, which alleged that the government is acting in a manner that infringes upon the rights of journalists. The motion highlighted that disciplinary actions were taken against journalists from the news outlet 'Adhadhu,' including their exclusion from President's Office press briefings. However, the Speaker ruled the motion inadmissible, citing the inclusion of factual inaccuracies, specifically regarding the claim that the journalists mentioned were being held in custody under a court order.
Meekail Ahmed Naseem, Member of Parliament for the South Galolhu constituency. | People's Majlis
The Parliament has rejected an emergency motion alleging that journalists are being arrested and obstructed from fulfilling their legal responsibilities in a manner that violates their fundamental rights.
The motion was introduced during Thursday's sitting by Meekail Ahmed Naseem, the Member of Parliament for the South Galolhu constituency.
The case states that Article 28 of the Constitution of the Republic of Maldives guarantees every individual the freedom of the press and the right to use telecommunication tools, as well as the right to receive and disseminate news, information, and opinions.
However, it was noted in the case that disciplinary action was taken against a journalist from Adhadhu following a question posed to the President during a press conference at the President's Office. The complaint further highlighted that another journalist from the same outlet faced similar measures regarding a published news report, and that the publication has now been entirely barred from attending press conferences held at the President's Office.
Furthermore, the motion highlighted that the Maldives has regressed in terms of press freedom, noting a significant decline in the environment for journalism and freedom of expression within the country. Consequently, the motion called for an end to the various forms of influence and pressure currently being exerted on journalists.
However, the chair rejected the motion. The presiding officer cited parliamentary regulations, which stipulate that emergency motions must be based on factual grounds. The chair noted that while Meekail's motion claimed journalists had been arrested, the individuals in question were actually being held in detention under a court order.
