The Judicial Service Commission (JSC) has introduced a new regulation granting the commission the authority to remove chief judges of courts from their positions, while leaving the specific conditions or criteria for such removals undefined.
The ‘Regulation on the Appointment and Removal of Chief Judges of Courts’ was published in the government Gazette yesterday and is now in effect.
While the regulation outlines procedures and criteria for appointing chief judges, it gives the commission broad discretion to remove a chief judge when it considers such action necessary, without requiring a specific reason to be stated.
According to Article 8 of the regulation, “the Commission reserves the power to remove a chief judge from their position whenever the JSC deems it necessary to strengthen the administration of the courts.”
However, the regulation does not specify the circumstances under which the JSC may exercise this power or provide a clear framework of criteria that must be met before a removal decision is made.
The regulation states that factors considered when appointing chief judges include legal proficiency, social perspective, communication skills, self-confidence, work ethics, administrative abilities and problem-solving skills.
Regulation Follows Previous Controversial Removal of Supreme Court Justices
The introduction of the regulation comes after controversy surrounding the removal of Supreme Court Justices Dr Azmiralda Zahir and Mahaz Ali Zahir last year.
The JSC’s decision to recommend the dismissal of the two justices faced criticism from several quarters, with concerns raised over transparency and whether the judges were provided a fair opportunity to defend themselves.
Parliament’s Counsel General Fathimath Filza also raised concerns over the process, questioning whether the removal of the justices had been carried out in accordance with constitutional safeguards.
During the JSC inquiry, critics alleged that the two justices were not given an opportunity to submit evidence or appear before the committee to present their defence.
Although the justices formally requested to appear before the panel, the committee declined to hear their testimony. The committee later stated that even if the justices had provided evidence, it would not have changed the outcome of the inquiry. The decision was criticised by legal observers and some members of Parliament, who described the process as lacking fairness and transparency.
The JSC’s inquiry had initially included Supreme Court Justice Husnu Al Suood, but he resigned from the bench before a formal review into his case could proceed.
Following the investigation, the JSC recommended the removal of Justices Azmiralda and Mahaz and submitted the recommendation to the People’s Majlis. The parliamentary judiciary committee subsequently endorsed the recommendation, leading to the approval of their dismissal.
