Advertisement
Azmiralda chairs a Supreme Court hearing.

Azmiralda alleges procedural violations, political interference

Azmiralda stated that in her 24 years in the judiciary, she had never used her position for personal gain.

14 May 2025
Advertisement

Azmiralda Zahir, who was removed from her position as a Supreme Court Justice on Wednesday, has issued a statement criticising state institutions and alleging that her dismissal was politically motivated and procedurally flawed.

The Parliament approved the removal of Azmiralda Zahir and Mahaz Ali Zahir from the Supreme Court bench, based on a recommendation by the Judicial Service Commission (JSC). The recommendation followed the arrest of Azmiralda's husband, Dr Ismail Latheef of Indira Gandhi Memorial Hospital (IGMH), at a massage parlour. The decision was passed by the government’s supermajority despite expressions of concern by international bodies, including the United Nations and the Human Rights Commission of the Maldives.

In a press statement following her dismissal, Azmiralda described the process as lacking transparency and due process. She stated that the proceedings were carried out in secrecy, and claimed that members of Parliament voted along party lines without considering legal or constitutional principles.

“Today, instead of fulfilling their responsibilities, members of Parliament have pressed the button for political orders,” the statement read.

Azmiralda argued that if the Maldives upholds the rule of law, the actions taken to remove her could be subject to criminal prosecution. She alleged that officials involved in the planning and execution of her dismissal had acted with impunity due to the absence of accountability mechanisms.

“Stopping the Supreme Court is not a simple matter. It cannot be lightly dismissed,” the statement said. She added that she hopes future administrations would investigate her complaints and take action based on them.

According to her statement, none of the complaints she submitted to various agencies were investigated. She listed the following grievances:

  • She has verifiable evidence for every complaint submitted to the JSC, the Anti-Corruption Commission (ACC), and other relevant agencies.

  • No institution was willing to hear or investigate her cases.

  • The JSC submitted what she claims to be a false report leading to her removal.

  • The ACC allegedly failed to take any statements from her and overlooked alleged corruption.

  • The police determined that there was no criminal case to investigate.

  • The Bar Council reportedly expressed concern about removing a judge based on a contested report.

  • The Parliament accepted the JSC's recommendation as procedurally valid without addressing constitutional or legal concerns.

Azmiralda stated that in her 24 years in the judiciary, she had never used her position for personal gain. She claimed the outcome of the case was predetermined and said she was removed based on a decision made before any investigation had taken place.

She also recounted a moment when she realised the direction of the case. According to her, Chief Justice Muthasim Adnan took a photograph with one of the suspended judges and remarked that they would not return to the Supreme Court. Azmiralda said that at that point, she understood the eventual outcome.

She alleged that, had her case not been reported by the media, she would have been dismissed in secret much earlier.

In her statement, she said she aimed to highlight the following:

  • The condition of judges in the Maldives.

  • Political pressure exerted on the judiciary.

  • Intimidation faced by judges under the guise of ethical reviews.

  • The vulnerability of judicial careers to political directives.

  • The extent of executive control over institutions that are meant to operate independently.

Azmiralda concluded by expressing concern over the independence of the judiciary and reiterated her hope for legal redress in the future.

Comments

profile-image-placeholder