December 20, 2025 03:59 pm (IST)
Follow us:
facebook-white sharing button
twitter-white sharing button
instagram-white sharing button
youtube-white sharing button
PM Modi slams ‘cut and commission’ TMC in virtual Taherpur address | US launches Operation Hawkeye Strike in Syria targeting ISIS after Americans killed | Horror on tracks: Rajdhani Express ploughs into elephant herd, eight killed in Assam | Horror in Bangladesh: Hindu man lynched and set on fire amid violent protests | Bangladesh in flames: Student leader Sharif Osman Hadi's death triggers massive protests, media offices torched | Chaos in Dhaka! Protesters assault New Age Editor, burn down newspaper offices amid deadly unrest | After campus shootings, Trump suspends green card lottery programme | ‘Worst is over,’ says IndiGo CEO after flight chaos; staff told to ignore speculation | Chaos at Hyderabad's Lulu Mall! Nidhhi Agerwal swarmed by fans, police register case | TCS bets big on AI, shares spike as company reveals ambitious plan

Maldives: UN expert concerned at 'unacceptable' dismissal of Supreme Court justices

| | Dec 23, 2014, at 01:57 pm
New York, Dec 23 (IBNS) The removal of two Supreme Court justices in the Maldives by local authorities threatens the independence of the country’s judiciary and further compromises the rule of law, the United Nations Special Rapporteur on the independence of judges and lawyers has warned.

“This decision seriously undermines the independence of the judiciary in the country and will have a chilling effect on the work of the judiciary at all levels,” Gabriela Knaul stressed in a news release issued on Monday.

“Since my visit to the Maldives in February 2013, I have been closely following a series of developments in the country that point at a serious deterioration of respect for the rule of law and the independence of the judiciary,” she warned.

The removal of the two justices, former Supreme Court Chief Justice Ahmed Faiz and Judge Muthasim Adnan, was approved by the People’s Majlis, the Maldives’ legislative body, three days after the enactment of the First Amendment to the Judicature Act which reduced the number of Supreme Court judges from seven to five.

Knaul noted that the procedure for the removal was characterized by a “lack of transparency and due process” – a fact, she said, that rendered their dismissal concerning and “particularly unacceptable.”

“Article 154 of the Constitution of the Maldives itself states that a judge may be removed from office only if the Judicial Service Commission finds the person grossly incompetent, or guilty of gross misconduct,” she added, highlighting that international human rights standards on this issue were “clear.”

She called on the authorities of the Maldives to reconsider the removal of the justices and to engage in a “transparent, impartial and independent process” in line with its international human rights obligations.

The Supreme Court of the Maldives has come under scrutiny from UN rights officials in recent years. In 2013, former High Commissioner for Human Rights Navi Pillay called for reforms to the judiciary to safeguard the rule of law following the Supreme Court’s repeated interventions in the presidential election process in the Maldives which, she said, were undermining the country’s democracy.

In that specific case, the Court had nullified the first round of the election on the basis of irregularities in the process, despite conclusions by national and international observers that the election was free and fair.

And, in October 2014, the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) voiced deep concern about a criminal case initiated by the Supreme Court of the Maldives against members of the country’s Human Rights Commission.

Support Our Journalism

We cannot do without you.. your contribution supports unbiased journalism

IBNS is not driven by any ism- not wokeism, not racism, not skewed secularism, not hyper right-wing or left liberal ideals, nor by any hardline religious beliefs or hyper nationalism. We want to serve you good old objective news, as they are. We do not judge or preach. We let people decide for themselves. We only try to present factual and well-sourced news.

Support objective journalism for a small contribution.