Court told amendment can't be enforced without new law

The State on Tuesday told the Supreme Court that a constitutional amendment on the removal of parliamentarians upon expulsion from their political party cannot be implemented until a law governing the process is enacted.

The amendment sets out four circumstances related to a member’s political party that may result in the loss of a parliamentary seat. One provision refers to expulsion “in accordance with the manner prescribed by law”.

The Supreme Court is hearing a case seeking to declare the amendment unconstitutional on the basis that it affects the structure of the Constitution.

State Counsel Fathimath Haleem said the amendment does not affect the independence of Parliament and does not grant political parties the authority to remove members without process.

She said the provision refers to a law that has not yet been drafted or enacted. As a result, she argued that the amendment does not currently allow parties to remove members.

“That law does not yet exist. Therefore, how can it be concluded that political parties already possess this power? The procedures for expulsion will only be known once this law is enacted. The reference to a law is intended to provide protection for the members’ independence,” she said.

Counsel for the petitioner, Sheena Mohamed, argued that any procedures linked to the amendment should have been included in the bill. She said there is no indication that a separate law is required and that the existing Political Parties Act already sets out procedures for expulsion.

“There is no written indication that an additional law would follow this bill. Why should we not assume that the ‘law’ mentioned refers to the existing Political Parties Act? That Act already contains the procedures for how political parties may expel their members,” she said.

Anas Abdul Sattar, representing the Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) as an intervenor, said the amendment links the loss of a seat to actions taken by a party. He said parties are required to follow the Political Parties Act, which provides for procedures to expel members.

“I am representing a political party. We must comply with the Political Parties Act. That Act mandates that a party’s charter must include the procedures for member expulsion. Thus, the law has already granted this authority to the parties,” he said.

The petitioners have sought an interim order to suspend the implementation of the amendment until a final ruling is issued. The Supreme Court is scheduled to consider the request on Tuesday at 1:30pm.