Article 24 of the Constitution of Maldives states that everyone has the right to respect for his private and family life, his home and his private communications. Moreover, Article 27 of the Constitution states that everyone has the right to freedom of though and the freedom to communicate opinions and expressions in a manner that is not contrary to any tenet of Islam, and Article 28 states that everyone has the right to freedom of the press, and other means of communication, including the right to espouse, disseminate and publish news, information, views and ideas. These rights embodied in Chapter II of the Constitution are absolute rights and freedoms unless they are limited by an act passed by the parliament in accordance with Article 16 of the Constitution. So who is accountable for these violations? The answer is something so clear and yet, hush for they might be charged for contempt of court for saying the answer out loud!
Furthermore, on 24 September 2013, the Supreme Court of Maldives suspended Husnu Al Suood, lawyer who represented the Elections Commission, Hisaan Hussain and Hassan Latheef, the lawyers who represented Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP). They were barred from attending the case that was lodged in order to annul the first round of presidential elections which was held on 7 September 2013. The letter sent to the lawyers by the Supreme Court stated that they were barred from appearing before the court as their remarks in the media as well as social media had allegedly diminished the dignity of the court and that they were being investigated. The letter sent to Hisaan Hussain stated that she had criticized the Supreme Court’s stay order to delaying the run-off elections until a verdict was reached. The Supreme Court served summons to the suspended lawyers on 25 November 2013. They were required to attend the court for investigations on contempt of court. However, the law on contempt of court states that a judge can rule on contempt of court for actions within the boundaries of the court only. If actions that amount to contempt of court had occurred outside the boundaries of the court, Maldives Police Service was mandated to investigate the matter and send the case to the Prosecutor General’s Office to be filed at the Criminal Court. Nevertheless, these lawyers are being investigated by the court clerks of the Supreme Court for alleged statements social media including “Twitter”. Firstly, the court does not have investigative authority and secondly, the bigger question is, how did the courts verify that the Twitter accounts belonged to the said lawyers? Furthermore, Hisaan Hussain attended the investigations, not knowing that she was being investigated and hence requested for her right to a lawyer. On 28 November 2013, she attended the investigations with her lawyer and was required to give a statement based on her alleged offence. Here is food for thought! What is the alleged offence? Under what law? Why is the Supreme Court investigating? Who is going to say that the court itself is in clear violation of the law?
Sources
[1] It was one of the earliest protests at a large scale.
[2] A Maldivian PhD holder who graduated from University of Birmingham in 1997.
Bibliography
Supreme Court questions MDP Lawyer Hisaan Hussain over alleged contempt of court, http://minivannews.com/politics/supreme-court-questions-mdp-lawyer-hisaan-hussain-over-alleged-contempt-of-court-72316
15 minutes with Sappe’, http://minivannews.com/politics/15-minutes-with-sappe-167
http://www.uncuffedmv.com/evan-naseem
http://www.freedomhouse.org/report/freedom-press/2013/maldives