Supreme Court defends transparency after Haveeru gag order

The Supreme Court claimed it has a policy of conducting trials transparency and openly to the media, after a a Haveeru journalist was ordered not cover a court trial.

The trial, which was presented to the Supreme Court by the Elections Commission, was being conducted to void the candidacy of Ibrahim Haleem, a Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) candidate running for Raa Atoll Innamaidhoo council in the upcoming Local Council Elections.

”Although the Supreme Court decided not to conduct the hearing of the case publicly, the policy of this court is to conduct trials transparently and publicly, and to allow the media to provide coverage according to the spirit of the constitution,” said Supreme Court a statement.

However the Supreme Court said the court will “always consider the honor and sanctity of the accused.”

”If the accused states that the court [trial] will affect his honor and sanctity, the court will consider the result of publishing such hearings after considering the nature of the case,” the court said.

The local media today reported that the Supreme Court has ruled that the candidacy of Ibrahim Haleem was voided.

Meanwhile, the Maldives Journalists Association (MJA) has issued a press statement claiming the trial was not the type of trial that should be conducted confidentially.

”We are very concerned that the Supreme Court has ordered a journalist not to report the hearing of the case concerning the candidacy of Ibrahim Haleem,” said the MJA.

The MJA said the Supreme Court’s order had narrowed the right to express opinion and right to media as guaranteed by the constitution.