SC to proceed with amendment case despite jurisdiction objection
The Supreme Court will continue hearing the case after the submission of written responses from both parties.
The Supreme Court has decided to proceed with the case filed by former MP Ali Hussain regarding a recent constitutional amendment, without making an immediate decision on the prosecution’s objection that the court lacks jurisdiction over the matter.
The Attorney General's Office had filed a procedural objection, arguing that the case could not be heard by the Supreme Court. During hearings held yesterday and today, judges discussed the jurisdictional issue, with both the prosecution and the petitioner responding to their queries.
Following deliberations, the bench, presided over by Chief Justice Ahmed Muthasim Adnan, announced that the case would proceed and that the court’s view on the jurisdictional objection would be included in the final ruling.
"The judges decided to proceed with the case and include their views on the procedural objection filed in the case," the Chief Justice stated.
The petitioner has been granted 10 days to submit a written reply addressing the prosecution's arguments, aligning with the deadline for the Attorney General's lawyers to submit their responses.
Ali Hussain’s petition challenges the amendment to Article 73 of the Constitution, claiming it contradicts Articles 4, 8, 26, 75, and 90 of the Constitution. His requests to the court include:
-
Declaring that the amendment is inconsistent with Articles 4, 90, and 75 of the Constitution.
-
Declaring that the amendment does not apply to the existing members of Parliament during its implementation period.
-
Ruling that the Parliament’s amendment process violated Articles 4, 8, 26, 75, and 90 of the Constitution.
These constitutional provisions include:
-
Article 4: Establishes that all powers of the Maldivian state originate from and continue with the people.
-
Article 8: Requires all state powers to be exercised in accordance with the Constitution.
-
Article 26: Ensures the right to vote and stand for election.
-
Article 75: Requires Members of Parliament to prioritise national and public interests over personal interests.
-
Article 90: Protects Members of Parliament from legal action for statements made or votes cast in Parliament or its committees.
The Supreme Court will continue hearing the case after the submission of written responses from both parties.
