Advisor to the President and former member of the Special Majlis constitution drafting committee, has raised the possibility of Maldivian Democratic Party-led protests against the seven Supreme Court judges after accusing the court of allowing itself to become being politicised.
‘’There is one thing we still need to get rid of. Citizens have decided who is in the executive branch, but the wishes of citizens are reflected in the courts,’’ Ibra said, speaking at an MDP rally last weekend.
Ibra claimed that in the time of former President Ibrahim Nasir the courts and the executive were separated and had no influence on one another.
‘’However, today the courts have been slowly politicised to the point where they issue press releases [on political matters],’’ he said, referring to a statement issued by the Supreme Court attacking him for criticising the institution and calling for people to stand up to the judiciary.
‘’If the courts are involved in politics, then the citizens have to go and set things right in the courts,” Ibra said at the rally.
The last time Ibra criticised the Supreme Court, the court issued a press release saying that his speech violated the constitution and principles of democracy, and that it could lead to havoc and unrest.
Ibra then sued the Supreme Court for defamation, lodging a case with the Civil Court, but it was rejected.
Speaking to Minivan News last week, Ibra said that the reaction from the Supreme Court and the Judicial Services Commission was tantamount to an admission of guilt on their part, and that ‘’they think that courts can’t be criticised, that they shouldn’t be touched. ‘’
‘’Many think that if you say something against the Supreme Court they can summon you the next day and sentence you to jail,’’ Ibra told Minivan News. ‘’People don’t know what the limitations of power are. Part of my making this case against the Supreme Court is to convince the public that you can criticise the Supreme Court and remain a free man.’’
(0)Dislikes
(0)Related Posts
Alhan alleges involvement of senior government officials in stabbing- Supreme Court initiates contempt charges against EC, begins surprise trial
- Supreme Court accepts case to invalidate transfer of power to speaker
- MDP calls for parliament to reconvene, fears “disgraced” Supreme Court judges may “abrogate will of the people”
- New CSC head asks president to resolve issue with Mohamed Fahmy Hassan
- Parliament postpones no-confidence votes against Home, Defence Minister over issue of secret ballot
And so the courts shuddered in apprehension.
For Ibra is truly a fearsome man. The multitudes that flocked to elect him at every turn will surely storm the halls of justice in their revolutionary fervor. All hail Ibra. The man of the people.
@Tsk Tsk: Just because someone is not popular does not mean someone is not speaking the truth. I am reminded of JS Mill's "On Liberty," one of the main points made being that the truth is so very often suppressed by the will, the opinion, the belief of the majority.
So, it is up to Maldivians whether they will have the strength to follow the truth, or the powerful.
Through the will of the ppl, the truth can become the powerful.
What if the truth is in fact "expressed" by the will of the majority? Or rather the will of the powerful?
Arguments on the objectivity, subjectivity, relativity and convenience of truth are all credible areas of philosophical inquiry.
However my humble opinion is that whatever the "truth" be it academic, strategic or managerial, the objective of my sarcasm was to rib Ibra about how he is able to get his statements heard by filtering them through the lens of political power and aligning it with the objectives of a powerful bloc.
I do not deny that the judiciary needs reform. Neither do I deny that the executive does as well. So does the parliament. Perhaps it is because of the youth of these institutions that such focus is required. Also due to the relative youth of our grasp of these institutions.
However those in the upper echelons have seen those institutions at work in other countries and they have the knowledge and experience to know how they work. When they speak based on mere political expediency, it is not for the true academic or true philosopher to merely declare them good or evil and write it off on that point.
Ibra is right in that Supreme court has no business in getting involved in politics. Sure the Majlis needs to be overhauled and get it's act together but cannot do so because the members have been elected by the people. It is the same for the executive, in this case the President and the VP. This is how a democracy works.
No courts in any country gets involved in the politics. No Supreme Court is pro active in other countries. It seems that people do not understand what a Supreme Court is.
I would like to know if all these press briefings of the Supreme Court has been signed by all the Judges on the Supreme Court bench? If not then the Court themselves is acting its own regulations. Supreme Court is different than other courts because its judges gives their own brief separately.
So as an organisation, the Supreme Court cannot issue any press releases.
Manik,
Everything is politicized, from the bedroom to the hotaa to the kitchen.
Sadly, there are groups within the country that are abusing the vital institution of the Supreme Court - a body whose members serve for life - to further their political goals.
This is such a short-sighted, greedy and irresponsible thing to do that it borders on treason.
Judicial activism isn't unheard of in other countries, and there are times when the Judiciary elsewhere has stepped in to draw the line in a public debate. But to have a Judiciary that appears to be actively colluding with elected politicians? That is outrageous.
There are some who seek to put this in the same bucket as 'hey, we need to fix the Executive and Legislative branches as well'. But that would be wrong.
The legislative and executive comes with some sort of self-corrective mechanism, called direct elections.
The Judiciary, on other hand, can slowly and irreparably destroy our democracy without ever being in the limelight.
This is why it is so important that people like Ibra highlight this issue and try to generate public support for a deserving cause.
It is a shame that some of us just can't seem to rise above petty personal obsessions even when looking a National issue.
Ibra is the biggest idiot in town..!
1. He criticizes the courts by cannot stand them defEnding his criticisms against them. In fact, he tries to files a case against them..! What a compete utter idiot...! Shows he is the worst kind of hypocrite: cry free speech and all but can't stand any others enjoying the same right.
2. He thinks he's a lawyer when he's clearly not. (well he thought he can be president when he cudn't even win more votes than Umar Naseer or baathil votes ..!). He thinks he gave birth to the new constitution n all... If there ever was a class A idiot it's hands down Ibraa;
3. Don't have much sympathy for the courts but at least The courts and other institutions have been appointed by the people directly or indirectly. Ibra was rejected for his recent bid for both president n even as an MP, his forte..! Biggest failure in town but with loudest mouth..!