Maldives targets state graft with new penal code amendment
The proposed changes underscore the government’s determination to hold high-ranking officials to a stricter standard of accountability.
The Maldivian government has taken a step toward tackling corruption and unjust enrichment among public officials by proposing an amendment to the Penal Code.
This amendment, announced by President Mohamed Muizzu, seeks to simplify the prosecution of former public servants who have allegedly amassed wealth through means not consistent with their income while in office.
The amendment, moved by Progressive National Congress (PNC) MP Hussain Riza Adam on behalf of the government, is set for its first reading in parliament on Monday.
It targets Article 515 of the Penal Code, which currently outlines the offence of unjust enrichment by public officials.
Riza, who also chairs the Judicial Service Commission, has emphasised that the amendment would eliminate existing legal obstacles and facilitate more effective investigations and prosecutions of corruption-related offences among former public officials.
The amendment to Article 515(h) outlines specific actions that would constitute unjust enrichment if committed by a public official, current or former. These provisions include:
-
1-
Disproportionate Standard of Living: Establishing or maintaining a lifestyle that appears significantly beyond the financial means available to the official during their term in office.
-
2-
Ownership of Unexplained Assets: Acquiring or owning properties or money in one's own name or in the name of family members or close associates that do not align with the income generated while in office.
-
3-
Failure to Justify Wealth: Inability to provide legal justification for one's standard of living or for assets owned by close associates or family members, which should be documented as permitted by law.
While these three stipulations currently exist in law, the proposed amendment aims to provide clearer language and remove ambiguities, thereby making it easier for authorities to identify and prosecute unjust wealth acquired during public service.
One significant change in the amendment is a shift in the burden of proof required to demonstrate unjust enrichment. Under the current law, the prosecution must prove that the wealth was obtained through "a serious criminal offense," which has posed significant challenges in courts. In the proposed amendment, the focus will instead be on recovering wealth or assets acquired unlawfully, without the need to prove a direct connection to a serious criminal act. This change acknowledges that individuals can accumulate unjust wealth through legal loopholes or other non-criminal means.
The amendment also modifies the classification and penalties for unjust enrichment offenses committed by high-ranking officials, including the President, ministers, Members of Parliament, and judges. For these individuals, unjust enrichment would constitute a second-degree felony, which carries a heavier sentence compared to other public officials, for whom the offense is categorised as a third-degree felony.
Currently, a conviction for a third-degree felony results in a prison sentence of three years and two months, while a fourth-degree felony carries a sentence of one year and seven months. The proposed changes underscore the government’s determination to hold high-ranking officials to a stricter standard of accountability.
Attorney General Ahmed Usham emphasised that the amendment is intended to address existing challenges faced by the police and the Prosecutor General's Office in investigating and prosecuting corruption cases involving unjust enrichment. The amendment will address interpretational issues within Article 515, providing greater clarity and removing the requirement to link unjust wealth explicitly to a serious criminal offense.
"The main purpose of this amendment is to solve that problem," Usham said, highlighting that the third count — which previously required property or money to be obtained through a serious criminal offense — has hindered effective prosecution. According to Usham, many instances of unjust wealth accumulation occur without direct criminal activity, making the current standard difficult to apply in practice.
