The People’s Majlis has written to the chief justice and the attorney general, stating that the president and vice president of the Election Commission (EC) were removed contrary to the constitutional procedures governing their appointment and dismissal.
The letter – signed by Speaker Abdulla Shahid and Deputy Speaker Ahmed Nazim – also noted that the move contravened the Elections Commission Act.
According to Majlis, the content of the letter was based on legal advice of parliament’s counsel general after her analysis of the Supreme Court’s verdict.
The Supreme Court yesterday sentenced EC President Fuwad Thowfeek to six months imprisonment under Article 88(a) of the penal code, and ordered the enforcement of the sentence be delayed for a period of three years.
The verdict also declared that Fuwad and Vice President Ahmed Fayaz had “lost the right and legal status to remain members of the commission and that the pair’s seats on the commission have become vacant”.
The letter stated that it was the People’s Majlis which is tasked with the appointment and removal of EC members, and that for any given reason a member of that commission can only be removed by a simple majority of votes in a parliament sitting as “clearly stated” in Article 177 of the constitution and Article 14 of the Elections Commission Act.
“Referring to the said article of the constitution and the elections commission act, it is clear that the authority to appoint and remove member from that commission is especially reserved for the People’s Majlis without the involvement of any other party.”
The letter also said that the removal of the pair by the Supreme Court contravenes the procedures specified in Article 177 of the constitution and Articles 5, 10, and 14 of the EC Act.
The letter referred to a number of statements from the Supreme Court’s verdict nullifying parliament’s removal of Mohamed Fahmy Hassan from the Civil Service Commission (CSC) in March last year.
The Majlis today noted that the constitutional procedures for removing EC members and CSC members were the same, saying that the court’s previous ruling had said the following:
“It is clear from the letter of the constitution that the constitution does not allow any of the three powers of the state to carry out the constitutional jurisdiction or functions of another, and that it is clearly stated that the system of separation of powers, and check and balance established between three powers by constitution is an principal feature of the constitutional system and the constitution of the Maldives.”
Referring to the same verdict, the letter said that the court had stated that “all powers of the state should fulfil their jurisdictions and functions within the constitutional limits set for that power by the constitution”.
The same ruling also stated that constitutional procedures regarding independent institutions are there to ensure their independence. In this regard, the verdict noted that tasking the executive with appointment, the parliament with removal and accountability, and the chief justice with oath taking are also check and balance procedures established under the constitutional principle of separation of powers.
(0)Dislikes
(0)Related Posts
Council elections to continue as scheduled even without candidate signatures- EC dismissals: President pledges to abide by court ruling, criticises MDP boycott talk
- EC dismissals: MDP condemns, government coalition commends decision
- “They say they have trust in the judiciary because they can influence it”: Nasheed
- MDP majority will reform Supreme Court and JSC, says Nasheed
- Parties prepare for Majlis elections as EC calls for applications
Obviously it's clear the regime does what it wants through the Supreme Farce and the police lapdogs.
Question is, what will the sane part of the Maldivian people do about it? Complain about it, protest on the street, but at the end let it all happen again?
You don't need a constitution anymore, Maldives isn't a democracy. Only Yameen and supreme court make decisions now. Sack the parliament members and save some money. Think of all the hookers, booze and dope the judges can buy with the extra cash.
Unconstitutional? May or may not be.
Practical? Damn well yes.
Maldives have a choice of having deadlocked system in the name of democratic ideals and "check and balances" that only checks and balance for the sake of check and balance
OR
a more practical system in which government CAN work with parliament
The latter is ugly but how pretty is a deadlocked parliament which gets people no where
The SC decesion is practical
Clearly the practical thing to do is just go back to the dictatorship. Human rights and an educated, productive population are highly overrated. Especially when you can have an elite that sucks all the wealth from tourism, fishing and human trafficking and while leaving its citizens poor and stupid. Good times for all!
where was these guys when Dictator Nasheed hijacked Judge Abdualla, ? was that legal and did Nasheed had legal rights to do that?
Where was the parliament when Dictator Nasheed arrested Yameen and Gasim ? Was that legal ?
Where were these thugs when Nasheed gave airport for nothing, ? Was it legal ?
Fuwad is a corrupt guy and he is a victim of Nasheed disease and he had manipulated voters list to favor Nasheed.
Does that mean anything to you .?
So who will the gun listens to Supreme Court or Majlis. I rest my case.
sacking of EC members is a carefully planned move to influence election outcome. tycoon jasim and his friends rule the country through SC where judges take bribes to support their unislamic lavish life style.
without sacrifice, the battle would be lost leading to an authoritarian regime.