Final hearing in constitutional case concludes, judges decide secret testimonies will not be taken

The Supreme Court has announced its decision not to take secret testimonies in the final hearing of the trial in the constitutional case filed by outgoing President Abdulla Yameen, requesting to annul the result of the 2018 Presidential Election.

While the trial began at 10:00 a.m and concluded on Tuesday afternoon, Supreme Court is yet to issue their verdict in the case.

At the commencement of the hearing, presiding Judge Dr. Ahmed Abdulla Didi had first announced the decision finalized by the bench of judges, that the secret witnesses presented by plaintiff President Yameen, will not be testifying in court, having found no reason to allow secret testimonies.

Speaking in the last hearing, lawyer Abbas Shareef had briefed the judges on the requirements of the plaintiff. As such, Shareef requested the court to investigate if any chemicals had been used during the printing process of the ballot papers, to check if pens with disappearing ink were used, as well as to check if the envelopes in which the ballot papers were brought in were sealed.

Shareef also requested the court to look into the matter of the security of ballot boxes, to check the actions of the officials who went into the security room as well as to issue an order to the Maldives Police Service (MPS) to inspect whether M7 Print, the company contracted with printing out the ballot papers, had printed additional ballot papers and if the officials at the polling stations had used fraudulent methods to add extra ballot papers to the sealed envelopes.

More points of concern noted by Shareef were, to check if the ballot papers bore the security features proposed by M7 print, to check if any of the ballot papers bore two checkmarks and if so, to check if they were marked with two different inks, to check the process of printing as well as to check if the ballot papers bore any sign of being erased.

Shareef further requested the court to annul the result of the 2018 election in light of all of the points of concern highlighted by the plaintiff.

The lawyer further claimed that if said chemicals had been used in the printing process, they would have been used on 30% of the ballot papers, going on to add that some of these allegations that are deemed to have occured during the election procedure, have also been filed at the complaint bureau.

Moreover, Shareef said that since the complaints were not filed as stated under the Presidential Election Act, if the election result was to be annulled, the court will not be required to announce the difference in number of votes received by each candidate.

Lawyer Hisaan Hussain representing the joint opposition parties in the case, stated that the constitutional case filed by the President is one that was filed without following due procedure after complaints surfaced regarding the Presidential polls.

Lawyer Hisaan Hussain speaks to the press after hearing concludes

Moreover, lawyer Hisaan stated that a eraser had been added to President Yameen’s imaginative allegations that are made up of a disappearing checkmark, a marker with disappearing ink, and a ring that elections officials allegedly used to rig the election. The allegations of an eraser being used had been added to the points noted by the plaintiff in Tuesday’s hearing.

Claiming these allegations to be baseless and imaginative, Hisaan stressed that President Yameen is attempting to steer the charges against the Elections Commission, towards someone else. However, Hisaan highlighted that it is the responsibility of the plaintiff to prove his case as well as to present evidence in the plaintiff’s favor.

The lawyer further stated that the Supreme Court supervising cases while the Maldives Police Service investigate it, goes against the judiciary system of the country. Hisaan described the constitutional case as one that was filed by President Yameen, in his refusal to accept defeat.

Hisaan further stated that she had appealed on the joint opposition coalition’s behalf, at court, to conclude the case as soon as possible as preparations for the oath-taking ceremony of President-elect Ibrahim Mohamed Solih are still underway, and as they still have to send invitations to many foreign diplomats.

The court had not revealed a specific time in which the verdict will be issued in the case.

President Yameen had filed the constitutional case in early October, after losing his bid for re-election to opposition candidate Solih in the Presidential Election held on the 23rd of September. Although he had initially accepted defeat the very next day, President Yameen had later pinned allegations of vote rigging on the Elections Commission, encouraging his supporters to take to the streets protest.

Since then, supporters of Yameen’s PPM have been holding serial protests, with spokesperson at the President’s Office, Ibrahim Muaz Ali going on to assert that the checkmarks PPM supporters put on President Yameen’s box had “glided down to Solih’s box” in front of their very eyes.

These allegations have taken the social media by storm, with PPM supporters drawing severe mockery and criticism from the opposition supporters.