News Desk
MALE’, Maldives — The suspension of three Supreme Court judges has thrust the Maldives into a judicial crisis, prompting an urgent appeal to the UN Commissioner for Human Rights, the European Union, and the Commonwealth. The case, filed by recently resigned Justice Husnu Sood, accuses the government of orchestrating an unconstitutional assault on the judiciary’s independence—a charge that has reverberated among legal fraternity.
Sood, who stepped down after his own suspension by the Judicial Service Commission (JSC), has called on international bodies to intervene. His complaint paints a stark picture: a government bent on silencing dissent within the Supreme Court, manipulating its composition, and stifling a constitutional challenge to a controversial amendment affecting parliamentary seats. The stakes, he argues, are nothing less than the rule of law itself.
The turmoil began when a bill amending the Courts Act surfaced, proposing to shrink the Supreme Court bench from seven judges to five. Rushed through Parliament in a matter of days, it passed just before a pivotal hearing on the constitutional amendment—leaving little room for debate. Then came the suspensions. Three justices—Sood included—were abruptly sidelined, halting the court’s ability to rule on the case. The timing, Sood contends, was no coincidence.
In his filing, Sood alleges a campaign of intimidation led by Attorney General Ahmed Usham, who reportedly dispatched an emissary to warn Supreme Court judges, including Chief Justice Ahmed Muthasim, of investigations into their conduct. Since President Dr. Mohamed Muizzu’s election, Sood claims, the judiciary has faced relentless pressure—loyalists installed in key positions, the JSC weaponized to target independent voices. The government, he says, is tightening its grip on all levers of power.
The suspensions have left the Supreme Court hobbled. Justices Azmiralda Zahir and Mahaz Ali, also under JSC scrutiny, have submitted statements to the commission defending their records. Meanwhile, Sood’s resignation marks a dramatic escalation in the standoff. The JSC’s probes, critics argue, lack transparency, with no clear explanation of the allegations against the judges.
The amended Courts Act, passed by a roll-call vote, sparked immediate outcry. Parliamentary Counsel General Fatima Filza, joined by a chorus of lawyers, decried it as unconstitutional—its provisions clashing with constitutional protections for judicial tenure. Their warnings went unheeded; the bill sailed through without discussion. Yet, in a surprising twist, President Muizzu has since returned it to the Majlis, for reconsideration. The Attorney General’s office now concedes that the law contradicts constitutional norms governing the dismissal of judges—a rare admission that has done little to quell the controversy.
For Sood, the fight is personal and systemic. His submission to the UN, EU, and Commonwealth details a judiciary under siege, its independence eroded by a government emboldened by electoral dominance. The constitutional amendment at the heart of the dispute—one that would empower political parties to disqualify MPs—remains in limbo, its fate tied to a court now unable to function.
International observers are taking note. The Maldives risks sliding into a deeper governance crisis. Sood’s plea for intervention underscores a broader warning: without swift action, the judiciary’s role as a check on executive power could be lost. For now, the suspended judges—and the nation—await a response from the global stage.
