PNC majority blocks debate on resolution over removal of 2 Supreme Court judges

Parliament on Monday rejected an opposition resolution calling for an investigation into the Judicial Service Commission's (JSC) handling of the dismissal of two Supreme Court justices, without allowing the motion to proceed to debate.

The resolution, submitted by the Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP), sought action over the removal of the judges based on allegations of criminal misconduct, despite prosecutors subsequently determining that there was insufficient evidence to bring criminal charges.

It was the first resolution rejected under amendments to Parliament's standing orders passed last week, which allow lawmakers to vote against accepting a resolution before it is debated.

Previously, parliamentary rules required resolutions to be debated after submission, with a vote on whether to accept them taking place following the debate.

However, amendments approved by Parliament, where the ruling People's National Congress (PNC) holds a supermajority, introduced a requirement for resolutions to receive majority support before proceeding to debate.

The MDP resolution was presented during Monday's parliamentary sitting by Galolhu North MP Mohamed Ibrahim, also known as Kudoo.

Following the reading of the resolution, lawmakers voted on whether it should be accepted for debate.

The motion was rejected with votes from 28 PNC members, while seven MDP lawmakers voted in favour of accepting it.

As a result, Parliament did not debate the resolution or consider its demands concerning the JSC's handling of the judicial dismissals.

The dispute concerns the suspension of three Supreme Court justices in February 2025 over allegations of abuse of influence.

The judges were Husnu Al Suood, Mahaz Ali Zahir and Azmiralda Zahir.

The suspensions were imposed while the JSC investigated allegations against the three judges.

Suood subsequently resigned, alleging government interference in the judiciary.

Mahaz and Azmiralda were removed from office in May 2025 following recommendations by the JSC. Their dismissals were approved by Parliament with the support of 68 lawmakers from the ruling party's supermajority.

The allegations against the judges were also investigated by the Anti-Corruption Commission (ACC).

Following the investigation, the matter was referred to the Prosecutor General's Office for consideration of criminal charges.

However, the Prosecutor General's Office subsequently determined that the available evidence was insufficient to prosecute the case.

The criminal investigation has since been closed.

The suspensions took place while the Supreme Court was considering a constitutional challenge to amendments that could result in MPs losing their parliamentary seats if they were expelled from their political parties.

The amendments had been challenged before the Supreme Court, with the case being heard by the court's full bench.

The timing of the suspensions prompted allegations that the action against the judges was intended to influence the proceedings and prevent a ruling against the government.

The suspension of the three justices also disrupted the Supreme Court's consideration of the constitutional challenge, with proceedings subsequently coming to a halt.

The MDP's resolution sought scrutiny of the JSC's actions in removing the two judges, particularly in light of the prosecution's conclusion that there was insufficient evidence to pursue criminal charges.

However, the resolution was rejected at the preliminary voting stage under Parliament's amended standing orders, preventing lawmakers from debating the matter.