Constitutional amendment leads to dictatorship, Yameen says
He argued that those supporting the amendment do so without a full understanding of the constitution.
Top Stories
Opposition leader and former President Abdulla Yameen on Sunday criticised a recent constitutional amendment that would result in a member of parliament losing their seat if they switch parties and are subsequently expelled, describing it as an effort to establish a dictatorial system.
At a rally at the PNF office Sunday evening, Yameen made the remarks in response to a speech by parliament speaker Abdul Raheem Abdulla, who defended the amendment. A PNF activist brought up the speaker's remarks, stating that the amendment was intended to secure electoral outcomes in parliamentary elections.
Yameen argued that the primary responsibility of parliament, as outlined in the constitution, is to hold the government accountable. He asserted that neither the government nor the judiciary can adequately manage accountability without Parliament.
"The amendment introduced to secure electoral outcomes undermines the rights of the people. It establishes a dictatorship, reversing democratic progress," Yameen stated.
Yameen, who faced criticism during his presidency from 2013 to 2018 for undermining rights and centralising power, accused the current government of repeating similar actions. He claimed the amendment would weaken democracy, describing it as a regression for the Maldives.
He further alleged that the amendment serves the interests of those in power, rather than the people, and accused the government of misusing its resources to manipulate electoral outcomes.
"You may win elections with money and influence, but that does not reflect genuine public support," Yameen said.
Yameen also criticised the People's National Congress (PNC), alleging that members of the dissolved Progressive Party of Maldives (PPM) are being absorbed into the PNC without public knowledge.
The former president concluded by stating that the constitutional amendment would be interpreted by legal experts as undermining democracy and the rule of law. He argued that those supporting the amendment do so without a full understanding of the constitution.
