JSC asked to probe bribery allegation against judge in Muizzu Noomadi case

A complaint has been submitted to the Judicial Service Commission (JSC) seeking an investigation into allegations that Criminal Court Judge Sofwath Habeeb accepted a bribe to acquit President Mohamed Muizzu in a criminal case related to the Noomadi Resorts arbitration.

The complaint was filed through the JSC's online complaints portal on Thursday following allegations made by former Commissioner of Police Hussain Waheed during a People's National Front (PNF) meeting on Sunday.

The Noomadi Resorts case stems from a housing project awarded during the administration of former President Mohamed Nasheed to construct housing units in the atolls. The contract was terminated while Muizzu served as Housing Minister on the grounds that the project was not progressing in accordance with the agreement. The dispute later proceeded to arbitration, after which the government was ordered to pay US$55 million in compensation to Noomadi Resorts.

The previous administration charged Muizzu with providing false information in a statement submitted to the arbitration tribunal. On 18 May 2023, while serving as Mayor of Malé, Muizzu was acquitted by the Criminal Court.

In his judgment, Judge Sofwath ruled that the prosecution had failed to prove beyond reasonable doubt that the statement submitted to the arbitration tribunal had been written or provided by Muizzu.

During the PNF meeting, Waheed alleged that one of the lawyers who represented Muizzu in the case had told him that MVR 800,000 had been paid to the judge to secure the acquittal.

"I asked one of his lawyers at the time what they did to get cleared from the court case. He told me they gave money to the judge. How much? MVR 800,000. That is what that lawyer told me," Waheed said.

Waheed also said he was prepared to swear on the Holy Quran that his account was truthful.

According to the complaint submitted to the JSC, soliciting or accepting a bribe is a criminal offence and a direct breach of the judicial code of conduct.

The complaint argues that when allegations of this nature are made publicly against a judge, an investigation is necessary to protect public confidence in the judiciary.

It states that if the allegation is substantiated, disciplinary action should follow. If the allegation is found to be false, the investigation would provide an opportunity to clear the judge's name.

The complaint also argues that former holders of senior public office should not be permitted to make unverified allegations against judges that could undermine confidence in the judicial system without the matter being examined.