No Obstruction for Muizzu to Take Oath Despite No-Confidence Motion Against Nasheed

During the session at the Supreme Court, today, the state clarified that the pending no-confidence motion against Speaker Mohamed Nasheed in the Parliament would not obstruct President-Elect Dr. Mohamed Muizzu from taking the oath of office.

This statement arose within the context of a case submitted by the ruling Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) to the Supreme Court. 

advertisement

advertisement

advertisement

The case was brought forth due to Deputy Speaker Eva Abdulla being unable to preside over parliamentary sessions, citing her association with Nasheed.

During the hearing, Justice Husnu Al Suood questioned Counsel General Fathimath Haleem from the Attorney General’s Office (AG Office) about whether the motion against the Speaker would impede President-Elect Muizzu from taking the oath.

Both the MDP and the state presented their arguments, highlighting the parliamentary regulations. They pointed out that when a no-confidence motion against the Speaker is pending, parliamentary debates or decisions can only proceed after resolving the motion.

It’s noteworthy that the organisation of Muizzu’s inauguration ceremony falls under the jurisdiction of the parliament.

In response, Fathimath Haleem indicated that while the parliamentary proceedings might have come to a halt, there is no obstruction for Muizzu to take the oath. However, she emphasised that the pending no-confidence motion might hinder the formation of the president-elect’s cabinet.

Haleem clarified that this hindrance stemmed from the specific tasks outlined in the parliament’s regulations, which don’t encompass the president-elect’s inauguration. Consequently, the regulation bars the parliament from engaging in debates or decision-making on other matters while a no-confidence motion against the Speaker is pending.

Elaborating further on the constitutional aspects, Haleem emphasised that the Maldivian Constitution’s Article 87 specifies the parliament’s decision-making capacity, which does not explicitly include the inauguration of the president-elect.

Despite the interpretation of laws and regulations, Haleem stressed that there was no explicit legal obstruction for Muizzu to take the oath.

The no-confidence motion against Nasheed was originally scheduled for last week, but it faced multiple delays primarily due to Eva Abdulla’s absence, citing illness. The sitting, which was set for the fifth time, was also adjourned as Eva recused herself from presiding over the session in light of the ongoing Supreme Court case and reported illness.

As a result, the Parliament Secretariat announced the suspension of sessions regarding Nasheed’s motion until the conclusion of the Supreme Court case.