Yameen says arrest of judges in 2018 wasn't politically motivated
Yameen said on Sunday that critics were likely to point to those events when he spoke about the judiciary.
Former President Abdulla Yameen has defended the arrest of two Supreme Court judges during his administration in 2018, saying the action was not politically motivated.
Yameen made the remarks at a People’s National Front (PNF) rally on Sunday night, where he also criticised the judiciary over delays in his V. Aarah case, which the High Court sent back to the Criminal Court for retrial.
The two judges — then-Chief Justice Abdulla Saeed and Justice Ali Hameed — were arrested after the Supreme Court issued an order on 1 February 2018 directing the release of nine political detainees, including opposition leaders, and ruling that 12 MPs who had defected from the then-ruling Progressive Party of Maldives coalition should not lose their seats.
Yameen’s administration subsequently declared a state of emergency. Security forces entered the Supreme Court and detained Saeed and Hameed.
The episode became widely known for images of security forces removing roofing sheets from the Supreme Court building during the operation.
Yameen said on Sunday that critics were likely to point to those events when he spoke about the judiciary.
He rejected the claim that the two judges had been detained because of the court order, saying the action followed information that raised suspicions of bribery.
Yameen questioned whether Supreme Court judges had the authority to issue an order affecting the state without hearing the parties involved or examining the matter in the usual way.
He said the Supreme Court itself later stated that the earlier order had been issued in haste and required further consideration.
Yameen alleged that information received after the order indicated that the judges had received improper benefits. He said the information was reported to police and that the judges resisted appearing before investigators.
He further alleged that Saeed had received two flats in Malaysia and Hameed three flats, and claimed the properties had been provided through parties linked to a company. These allegations were presented by Yameen as justification for the action taken at the time.
Yameen said the judges were taken in for questioning over how they had acquired assets that appeared inconsistent with their income, rather than because of the Supreme Court order.
“It was not a political act in any way,” Yameen said. “While we were trying to find out why this had happened, messages started coming from people who knew about it.”
He also criticised a provision in the Supreme Court order which, according to him, prevented the judges from being summoned by an investigative authority at any stage in connection with the ruling. Yameen claimed that the judges had used the Constitution for their own protection.
Referring to the use of force at the Supreme Court during the arrests, Yameen said the circumstances had reached a point where such action became necessary.
“If Supreme Court judges are going to issue orders in that manner, it will not be enough to remove only the roofing sheets. Other things may also have to be removed,” Yameen said.
Yameen’s remarks came as he criticised delays in the retrial of his V. Aarah case. He rejected the explanation that hearings had been delayed because of limited courtroom space, saying courts had previously conducted lengthy hearings when authorities wanted cases concluded quickly.
The High Court earlier ordered the Criminal Court to hear the V. Aarah case again.
