Transparency Maldives raises concern over referendum question
Some legal experts have questioned how the issue has arisen.
Transparency Maldives has raised concern over the referendum on shortening the term of the current parliament in the Maldives by six months.
Some legal experts have questioned how the issue has arisen. They state that the question in the referendum does not refer to the term of the 20th Parliament. A constitutional case has also been filed in the Supreme Court, claiming the matter is unconstitutional.
The question presented in the referendum asks whether voters approve the President endorsing the 8th amendment to the Constitution to hold presidential and parliamentary elections together and to define rules for calculating the term of Parliament.
Lawyers who filed the case in the Supreme Court state that the bill must be submitted to a referendum, as required by the Constitution if the term of Parliament is to be changed. They note that, in such a case, the question should ask whether the term of the current House should be shortened.
Transparency Maldives stated that the purpose of both direct and indirect voting under Article 262 of the Constitution is to present the decision of the public with clear information on the process.
The organisation noted that next Saturday’s referendum includes a change to the role of Parliament, which is among the objectives of the Constitution. It stated that voters may lack clarity on the question, as the current parliamentary term, due to end in May 2029, would conclude about five or six months earlier.
“As it stands now, the people are not fully empowered to make a fully informed decision when this question is the only formal means of gaining the consent of the people in the Constitution,” the organisation said in a statement.
The statement also raised the following points:
-
A 1233% increase in the number of registrants to vote in foreign countries compared to previous elections during a referendum on governance and the Constitution, with no polling stations to be established for Maldivians abroad.
-
A reduction in the period allocated for the opinion poll campaign, shorter than the period set out in the Venice Commission’s Revised Code of Good Practice on Referendums.
-
The legal requirement that more than 50% of the total vote is sufficient in referendums on constitutional amendments, regardless of voter turnout.
Transparency Maldives also proposed measures to address these issues, including:
-
Publishing full information, including supporting and opposing views, in future opinion polls.
-
Holding debate in Parliament before referendums on constitutional amendments and conducting public consultation before Parliament passes related bills.
-
Amending the Opinion Poll Act to extend the campaign period, establish a campaign finance framework, and increase the required majority for constitutional amendments.
