ACC Declines to Disclose Details of Investigation Into Supreme Court Justices

The Anti-Corruption Commission (ACC) of the Maldives has declined to disclose details regarding its ongoing investigation into three Supreme Court justices, following their suspension by the Judicial Service Commission (JSC).

The JSC announced the suspension of justices Husnu Al-Suood, Mahaz Ali Zahir, and Dr Azmiralda Zahir, citing an ongoing criminal investigation. In response to media inquiries, the ACC confirmed that it had received a complaint concerning the three judges but refrained from providing further details. The commission reiterated its commitment to investigating all individuals impartially if allegations of corruption were raised against them. It also stated that its actions were guided by the Maldives’ criminal justice system and relevant laws and regulations.

advertisement

advertisement

advertisement

The JSC, in its statement, confirmed that it had informed the ACC of the ongoing investigation and decided to suspend the judges following a commission meeting.

The suspension follows the recent approval of a bill in Parliament to reduce the number of Supreme Court justices from seven to five. The bill was passed by the ruling People’s National Congress (PNC) with a majority vote of 68–9, shortly after opposition MPs from the Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) were ejected for protesting against the legislation. The amendment, submitted by Holhudhoo MP Abdul Sattar Mohamed, was fast-tracked through Parliament, with the Judiciary Committee approving it without changes.

The Bar Council has raised concerns over the amendment, urging President Dr Mohamed Muizzu not to ratify it and to send it back to Parliament for revisions. The council has also written to the Attorney General and the JSC, arguing that the amendment violates articles 148, 149, and 154 of the Constitution. It stated that Supreme Court justices can only be removed if found guilty of misconduct by the JSC and expressed concern that the Maldives risked regressing to past practices of dismissing judges through legislative changes.

Under the amendment, the JSC is required to determine two justices as incompetent and submit their names to Parliament within five days of the law taking effect. Parliament must then decide on their removal within seven days. The Bar Council has argued that this process directly contradicts the Constitution and the Judicial Service Commission Act.

The developments have sparked criticism from the opposition, with the MDP alleging that the government is seeking to influence the judiciary. The timing of the amendment has raised particular concern, as the Supreme Court was set to hear a case challenging the recent constitutional amendment on anti-defection.

The amendment in question, passed and ratified on 20 November 2024, introduced additional circumstances under which parliamentarians could lose their seats, including expulsion from their political party. Former Kendhoo MP and lawyer Ali Hussain filed a constitutional case on 24 November, arguing that the amendment violated fundamental constitutional principles. The Supreme Court began hearings on 17 February and decided to proceed with the case, rejecting a motion from the state to dismiss it.

A crucial hearing was scheduled for 11:00 am on Wednesday, 26 February, regarding a request for an injunction to suspend the enforcement of the anti-defection amendment. However, the hearing was cancelled following the suspension of the three justices.

Ali Hussain has expressed concern over the suspensions, alleging that the cases against the justices were “manufactured” by the ACC. He stated that there had been no prior reports of an investigation and accused the government of attempting to undermine judicial independence.

The JSC has not disclosed further details about the investigation but confirmed that the suspensions were decided at a meeting held last morning.

The opposition and legal professionals have raised concerns that the recent developments could undermine judicial independence in the Maldives, with calls for greater transparency regarding the government’s intentions behind the amendment to the Judicature Act.