Nasheed No-Confidence Motion Will Not Stall Muizzu’s Inauguration, Supreme Court

The Supreme Court weighed in on the contentious issue of the no-confidence motion against Speaker Mohamed Nasheed, asserting that any impediment to the motion should not hinder the upcoming inauguration of President-elect Dr. Mohamed Muizzu.

The Motion, filed by the Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) against their former leader, has faced obstacles, primarily due to the unavailability of Deputy Speaker Eva Abdulla who cited poor health as the reason for her inability to chair sittings.

advertisement

advertisement

advertisement

advertisement

Seeking resolution, the MDP brought the matter before the Supreme Court on October 29, prompting interventions from both the Democrats and the Progressive Party of Maldives- People’s National Congress (PPM-PNC), both expressing a vested interest in the case.

The Court delivered its verdict on Thursday, with Justice Mahaz Ali Zahir stating that the bench unanimously agreed that a delay in the no-confidence motion should not impede the Parliament’s fulfillment of its constitutional and procedural obligations, as outlined in the Constitution and the Parliament’s Standing Orders.

Referring to Article 205 (c) and (d) of the Parliament’s Standing Orders, Mahaz emphasized that a delay in the motion does not preclude the Parliament from conducting its essential functions. Article 205 (c) mandates the presentation of a no-confidence motion against the Speaker at the first sitting after the notice period expires, while Article 205 (d) prohibits any debate or decision on other matters once the motion is presented.

Mahaz contended that these two clauses are inseparable, emphasizing that the Parliament is legally obliged to adhere to these provisions. He clarified that such a decision would not diminish the Constitution’s authority over the Parliament’s Standing Orders. He clarified that such a decision would not compromise the Constitution’s supremacy over the Parliament’s Standing Orders.

In addressing concerns about potential delays preventing the President-elect from taking the oath of office, Justice Mahaz underlined that the Parliament’s obligations under the Constitution take precedence. 

Aditionally, the Supreme Court ruled that the Parliament’s decision to halt the no-confidence motion against Nasheed was deemed unlawful.