Tag: Chief Judge of High Court Ahmed Shareef

Civil Court halts judicial watchdog from taking further action against High Court Chief Judge

Civil Court on Thursday issued an injunction ordering the Judicial Service Commission (JSC) not to take any action against the suspended Chief Judge of High Court Ahmed Shareef, until it decides on the legality of his suspension.

The injunction comes the same day the Civil Court cancelled a hearing of the lawsuit filed against the JSC by the suspended chief judge, after the JSC claimed it could not “print a statement” that was to be presented to court due to an “IT failure”.

The Chief Judge of the High Court was “indefinitely suspended” by the JSC shortly after the High Court cancelled a hearing of the appeal case filed by former President Mohamed Nasheed.

The hearing of Nasheed’s case was scheduled to decide on procedural issues raised by the JSC contending that the High Court did not have the jurisdiction to hear the case, which involved the legitimacy of a panel of judges appointed by the commission to preside over the former president’s trial at the Hulhumale’ Magistrate Court.

The JSC however, in a press conference denied any connection with the case but claimed that Shareef’s suspension was regarding a complaint filed against the judge over a year ago.

The Chair of the JSC, Supreme Court Justice Adam Mohamed, was quick to give his reasoning of the suspension, contending that it was a “precautionary” measure while investigation of the complaint was proceeding.

Following the decision, Judge Shareef subsequently challenged the JSC’ decision in Civil Court claiming that the decision contrasted the existing laws and had undermined the independence that a Judge require in executing his legal duties. He had also, through the lawsuit, requested the Court to issue an injunction halting his suspension.

Shareef is represented by veteran lawyer and former Attorney General Husnu al Suood and his law firm Suood Anwar & Co.

The Civil Court Judge Hathif Hilmy dismissed the case after Shareef and his legal team failed to appear before the court on time. However, Shareef’s lawyers again re-filed the case on the same day.

Had it not been cancelled, the JSC was expected to respond to the lawsuit on Thursday’s hearings, but lawyers representing the JSC told the court that commission’s intranet network crashed and therefore they were not able to print the statements which they planned to present to the court.

When the presiding judge proposed to delay the hearings for a later time in the evening, the lawyers claimed the problem could not be fixed within the day.

Responding to the claim, Shareef’s lawyer Suood argued at the court that JSC could have easily printed the statement from another printing shop using a flash drive.

However the JSC lawyers told the court that it would not be able to present the statements the same day even if the printing was done externally.

Following the claim, the presiding judge cancelled the hearing without scheduling a future hearing.

Despite the JSC’s suspension of Judge Shareef following the High Court case regarding Nasheed, the commission is yet to take a similar “precautionary action” against Supreme Court Justice Ali Hameed – who appeared in a leaked video indulging in adultery with a with foreign women that is now circulation on social media networks.

Hameed’s sex tape came into media limelight after the arrest of Ahmed Faiz on charges of blackmail – a senior Council Member of President Waheed’s Gaumee Ihthihaad Party (GIP) and former Project Advisor at the Housing Ministry.

A police investigation is already proceeding and Hameed was also summoned for questioning. In the meantime, the JSC itself formed a five member committee to look into the matter which includes JSC Vice Chair Abdulla Didi, commission members Latheefa Gasim, Ahmed Rasheed and two outside lawyers.

Senior figures of the state including President Mohamed Waheed have expressed “sadness” over the incident with the president noting that should the video be authentic, it raises “serious questions”.

However, JSC is yet to take any action against the Supreme Court Justice, who continues to preside over Supreme Court cases even for a precautionary measure.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Civil Court issues injunction blocking JSC from further action against Chief High Court Judge

The Civil Court has issued a temporary injunction ordering its own watchdog body, the Judicial Service Commission (JSC), not to take any further action against Chief Judge of High Court Ahmed Shareef until it rules on a case concerning his suspension.

The new injunction issued by the Civil Court orders the JSC not to take any action against Chief Judge Shareef that would undermine his rights. The order will take effect until proceedings in the case filed by Chief Judge Shareef conclude.

Chief Judge Shareef’s lawyers originally requested the Civil Court invalidate JSC’s suspension but the court there was no reason to issue such an injunction.

In May the JSC ‘indefinitely suspended’ the Chief Judge over a complaint filed against the judge last year.

During a press conference held by the commission to announce its decision, JSC Chair and Supreme Court Justice Adam Mohamed Abdulla insisted that the disciplinary action had no relation to the ongoing High Court case filed by former President Mohamed Nasheed contesting the legitimacy of the Hulhumale’ Magistrate Court bench, appointed by the JSC.

According to Justice Adam Mohamed, the suspension was a “precautionary” measure while investigation of the complaint was proceeding.

“There are no legal grounds to stop looking into a complaint submitted [to the commission] or halt proceedings,” he said.

Shortly after the suspension, attorneys representing the High Court Chief Judge led by former Attorney General and President of Maldives Bar Association Husnu Al Suood filed a lawsuit at the Civil Court challenging the suspension.

Suood said Chief Judge Shareef had been suspended in contradiction of existing laws, and the decision undermined the independence a judge requires in executing his legal duties.

He said the Chief Judge’s team of counsels will plead in court that the decision by the JSC was an attempt to unduly exercise influence over judges. He also added that once the case is registered at the Civil Court, a request will be made at the Supreme Court to take over the case, as has been the previous practice.

“That is not a small thing when you get a suspension after one year. Suspending a country’s Chief High Court Judge  is not a small thing,” Suood told local media.

He also said the JSC’s passing a motion to suspend the judge with a vote of just three members – two of whom represented the executive – led to presumption that the vote had been influenced.

According to local media reports, the call for an indefinite suspension of the Chief Judge was proposed to the JSC by the incumbent Attorney General Aishath Bisham – who is yet to receive parliament’s consent following her appointment – and was passed by the vote of three members out of the 10-member commission.

“There is reason to believe this decision had political motives behind it,” Suood claimed at the time.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

JSC “fully controlled by political figures”: lawyer for Chief High Court judge

Judicial Service Commission (JSC) is set to face another court battle after attorneys representing Chief Judge of High Court Ahmed Shareef announced on Thursday that they would challenge the commission’s decision to suspend the judge.

Chair of JSC, Supreme Court Justice Adam Mohamed, had earlier held a press conference declaring the commission had decided to “indefinitely suspended” Chief Judge Shareef, over a complaint filed against the judge last year.

That decision came hours after the High Court temporarily halting the hearings of a case against the JSC lodged by former President Nasheed – who has accused the judicial watch-dog of exceeding its mandate in appointing the three-member judges panel to the Hulhumale Magistrate Court currently hearing a criminal case against him.

According to the JSC Chair, the suspension of Chief Judge Shareef – who is among the three judges presiding over the Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) presidential candidate Mohamed Nasheed’s case – was a “precautionary” measure while investigation of the complaint was proceeding.

Judge Shareef in the new Civil Court lawsuit against the JSC will be represented by former Attorney General and veteran lawyer Husnu Al Suood and his law firm, Suood, Anwar and Co.

Briefing the media about the court case which is set to be filed on Sunday, Suood said that Chief Judge Shareef was suspended in contrast with the existing laws and the decision undermines the independence a Judge requires in executing his legal duties.

He said the Chief Judge’s team of counsels will plead in court that the decision by the JSC was an attempt to unduly exercise influence over judges.

He also added that once the case is registered at the Civil Court, a request will be made at the Supreme Court to take over the case, as has been the previous practice.

The Supreme Court previously took over the case filed at Civil Court by prominent lawyer Ismail Wisham against the JSC, challenging the legitimacy of the Hulhumale Magistrate Court it created.

The case was also represented by Suood, which eventually led to the Supreme Court endorsing the legitimacy of the controversial court in a 4 to 3 majority decision in which Chair of JSC and Supreme Court Justice Adam Mohamed cast the controversial deciding vote, despite initial pleas against the judge sitting on the bench by Suood on the ground of ‘presumption of bias’.

“Not a small thing”

Speaking of the JSC’s decision, Suood – who is also the President of Maldives Bar Association – said the suspension coming after the JSC sitting’s on the case for a year was “not a small thing”.

“That is not a small thing when you get a suspension after one year. Suspending a country’s Chief Judge of High Court is not a small thing,” he said.

JSC Chair Adam Mohamed has meanwhile said “there are no legal grounds to stop looking into a complaint submitted [to the commission] or halt proceedings”.

According to local media reports, the call for an indefinite suspension of the Chief Judge was proposed to the JSC by the incumbent Attorney General Aishath Bisham – who is yet to receive parliament’s consent following her appointment – and was passed by the vote of three members out of the 10-member commission.

Those who voted in favour included two representatives of the executive branch, the attorney general herself, the President Mohamed Waheed Hassan’s representive Mohamed ‘Reynis’ Saleem, and a third vote by Criminal Court Judge Abdulla Didi.

The public’s member to the JSC Sheikh Shuaib Abdul Rahman opposed the motion while lawyers’ eepresentative Ahmed Rasheed and Civil Service Commission (CSC) Chair Mohamed Fahmy Hassan abstained. High Court Judge Abdulla Hameed did not participate in the vote.

Both the Speaker of parliament Abdulla Shahid and Parliament’s representee to the commission MP Gasim Ibrahim did not attend the meeting.

Politically motivated and influenced

Suood said the JSC’s passing of a motion to suspend the judge with a vote of just three members – two of whom represented the executive – lead to presumption that the vote had been influenced.

He said that such a grave motion being passed by the support of just three members also led to the belief that the JSC was seeking to undermine the independence of the judges.

“There is reason to believe this decision had political motives behind it,” said the veteran lawyer.

Suood further said the decision could also be perceived as a way to prevent a further delay of the case filed by Nasheed, who is contesting the legality of the three-member judges panel appointed to Hulhumale Magistrate Court by the JSC.

“The JSC is one party to the ongoing High Court case of which Chief Judge Shareef is among the judges who presiding over the case. It is wrong in every aspect for JSC to take action against the judge,” he said. “Due to such actions, public confidence in state institutions is being lowered day by day.”

“Entire judiciary under the influence of retired Supreme Court Judge Mujthaaz Fahmy” – Suood

Suood also alleged that two parliament members and a retired Supreme Court judge have long been influencing the work of judges and their verdicts on several cases.

Suood claimed that the presidential candidate for the government-aligned Progressive Party of Maldives (PPM) Abdulla Yameen Abdul Gayoom, the Deputy Speaker of Parliament and PPM MP Ahmed Nazim, and retired Supreme Court Judge Mujthaz Fahmy have long been in the business of influencing the judges and the verdicts they had been issuing.

He further contested that his allegations were based on evidence, and said he would do everything possible to make the judiciary free from such undue influences.

“The entire judiciary is under the influence of [retired Supreme Court Judge] Mujthaaz Fahmy ,” he alleged.

Suood further alleged that Deputy Speaker Nazim had close ties with members of the JSC, and said several judges had told him that Yameen Abdul Gayoom – half brother of  former President of 30 years, Maumoon Abdul Gayoom – had on several occasions given instructions to the judges over the phone as to how their sentences should be phrased.

Despite claiming to have strong evidence to support his allegations, Suood admitted that it would be extremely difficult for the authorities to take action against the three individuals.

JSC juggling judges to appease politicians

Suood further contended that the JSC had been taken over “dark powers”, and that it was fully under the control of certain political figures.

He alleged that in a bid to serve the interests of a few politicians, the JSC was planning to juggle judges from court to court and even had planned to give salary increments to certain judges.

Among the planned switches, Suood claimed that Chief Judge of Criminal Court Abdulla Mohamed – who was taken into military detention during former President Nasheed’s administration over allegations of gross judicial misconduct – is set to be transferred to Civil Court, while JSC member and Criminal Court Judge Abdulla Didi will become the Chief Judge of the Criminal Court.

Among other changes, Suood claimed that JSC had been working to transfer the two “best serving” Civil Court Judges – Judge Aisha Sujoon and Judge Mariyam Nihayath to the Drug Court.

“These things are carried out under a great plan. They are installing judges to courts as they please,” Suood said.

Denial

All the three individuals accused by Suood have dismissed the allegations in responses given to local media.

Speaking at a membership event held in PPM’s headquarters on Friday night, PPM’s presidential hopeful Yameen Abdul Gayoom denied the allegations, describing them as an “outright lie”.

“The JSC is taking action against a judge. They don’t have judges sitting on the JSC. Therefore I do not believe anyone can influence the JSC,” Yameen said.

He further expressed his frustration over the allegations claiming that it had become common for people to make erroneous and slanderous remarks against political figures.

“This would not have happened if defamation had been kept as a criminal offence. All this is happening because defamation has now been changed to a civil wrong,” he said.

He further said that even though he did not influence judges and their work, he admitted to speaking about lapses within the judiciary and the delaying of cases on public forums.

“It would be better for Suood to stop making such irresponsible comments and focus on working for his clients,” Yameen responded.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

JSC rejects complaint by High Court judges against Chief Judge Ahmed Shareef

The Judicial Service Commission (JSC) has rejected the case submitted by eight members of the High Court against Chief Judge Ahmed Shareef over his suspension of former President Mohamed Nasheed’s trial in the Hulhumale Magistrate Court.

Last Wednesday eight of the High Court’s nine-member bench filed the case claiming that the chief judge had issued the stay order without registering the case, had failed to assign a case number to the case, and had not discussed the matter with the other judges.

The judges also accused the chief judge of taking the matter into his own hands by not discussing the matter with them before issuing the order.

A spokesperson from the JSC confirmed to Minivan News at the time that the commission had received a “letter” from the eight judges regarding Judge Shareef.

A High Court official denied the allegations made by the judges, stating that the case concerning the stay order was registered at the court the previous week and that the former President’s legal team had paid the charges the following day.  He also added that the order was issued after the court had received the payment.

During a meeting held on Thursday the JSC decided to not look into the case, claiming that a conflict of interest existed in the commission probing the matter, as it had appointed the three member judges panel to the Hulhumale Magistrate Court. The court is currently hearing all trials concerning the arrest of Chief Judge of Criminal Court Abdulla Mohamed.

The members of the judicial watchdog also came to the conclusion that the case filed by the eight judges included issues concerning High Court procedure, which it claimed could only be looked into after the Supreme Court made a decision regarding the matter.

Six of the 10-member commission were reportedly against looking into the case while only one member was voted in favour, according to local media.

The High Court Chief Judge issued the injunction after the Hulhumale Magistrate Court rejected a request by former President Nasheed’s legal team to defer his trial until the end of the scheduled presidential elections, despite no objection from the state prosecutors.

The former president – who stands charged of unlawfully detaining the Chief Judge of Criminal Court during his last days in power in January 2012 – appealed the decision at the High Court while also contesting that the JSC had appointed the panel of judges to the magistrate court arbitrarily.

Following the appeal, the High Court granted a stay order ordering the magistrate court to halt Nasheed’s trial until it decided on the legitimacy of the panel of judges appointed to examine his case. The stay order was signed by Chief Judge Ahmed Shareef, and stated that the court was of the view that Nasheed’s ongoing trial must come to a halt until the legitimacy of the bench was established.

Concerns

Following the filing of the case at the JSC against Chief Judge Ahmed Shareef, member of former President Mohamed Nasheed’s legal team Hassan Latheef has expressed his concern as to whether JSC would look into the matter impartially and transparently.

Speaking during an opposition Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) rally held on Wednesday evening, Latheef – who was the minister for human resources, youth and sports during Nasheed’ presidency –  argued that the decision by the Chief Judge of High Court regarding the stay order was made in accordance with the High Court’s normal procedures.

Latheef claimed that based on the documents published at the high court website, out of the 15 stay orders issued in 2012 by the High Court in 2012, 10 stay orders had been signed by just one High Court judge.

“The Hulhumale Magistrate Court which is hearing the case of President Nasheed was ordered to be suspended by High Court in according to its usual practice in such cases. The case was registered at the High Court and even before there were instances were stay orders had been issued that had only one signature,” Latheef said.

Latheef also dismissed the claims that the case had not been registered at the court.

“We filed the case on March 31. The stay order was issued the afternoon of the following day, after we had even paid the charges for filing the case in the court,” he contended. “Another question is who will look into the case impartially – all the other judges have filed this case at the JSC against Chief Judge Shareef. Eight judges are on one side while the chief judge is on the other side. These are new issues which have come out of the case.”

He noted that this was the first time in Maldivian legal history where an entire panel of judges had teamed up against the chief judge following a decision on a case.

JSC under heavy scrutiny

The JSC has come under heavy scrutiny over its appointment of the panel of the judges to Hulhumale Magistrate Court to hear cases concerning the arrest of Chief Judge of Criminal Court Abdulla Mohamed – which several lawyers and members of the JSC itself have claimed exceeded the JSC’s mandate.

Among the JSC’s critics include JSC member Sheikh Shuaib Abdul Rahman – the member appointed from among the public.  Sheikh Shuaib Abdul Rahman previously claimed the JSC had arbitrarily appointed three magistrates from courts across the Maldives to Nasheed’s case after dismissing the three names first submitted to the commission by the Hulhumale’ Magistrate Court.

Speaker of Parliament Abdulla Shahid – who is also a member of the JSC – stated that he believed that the judicial watchdog had acted unconstitutionally in assigning magistrates to a particular case.

“In deciding upon the bench, the JSC did follow its rules of procedures. As in, it was voted upon in an official meeting and six of the seven members in attendance voted on the matter. The seventh member being the chair, does not vote in matters,” Shahid explained.

Other critics included United Nations Special Rapporteur (UNSR) on the Independence of Judges and Lawyers, Gabriela Knaul, who also said the appointment was carried out arbitrarily.

“Being totally technical, it seems to me that the set-up, the appointment of judges to the case, has been set up in an arbitrary manner outside the parameters laid out in the laws,” Knaul said, responding to questions from media after delivering her statement in February.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

High Court judges file case against Chief Judge over suspension of Nasheed trial

Eight judges of the High Court’s nine-member bench have filed a case with the Judicial Service Commission (JSC) against Chief Judge of the High Court Ahmed Shareef , for suspending the Hulhumale Magistrate Court’s trial of former President Mohamed Nasheed without allegedly registering the case in court.

The High Court on Monday ordered the Hulhumale’ Magistrate Court to suspend former President Mohamed Nasheed’s trial until it determined the legitimacy of the panel of judges appointed to examine his case. The stay order, signed by Chief Judge Ahmed Shareef, stated that the court was of the view that Nasheed’s ongoing trial must come to a halt until the legitimacy of the bench was established.

Following the decision, the Hulhumale-based magistrate court suspended all trials concerning the detention of Criminal Court Judge Abdulla Mohamed in 2012.

According to local media reports, the High Court judges who filed the case against Chief Judge Shareef claimed he had issued the stay order without registering the case, did not assign a case number to the case, and had not discussed the matter with the other judges.

They claimed that usual practice at the court was to discuss the matter with other judges, although stay orders were ultimately issued by a single judge.

A spokesperson from the JSC confirmed to Minivan News that the commission had received a “letter” from eight judges of High Court regarding Judge Shareef. However, he declined to provide any details of the case.

This is the second such case filed against Judge Shareef by the other members of the bench.

However, speaking to local media, a High Court media official denied the allegations made by the judges, stating that the case concerning the stay order was registered at the court on Sunday and the former President’s legal team had paid the charges the next day. The media official added that the order was issued after the court had received the payment.

He also said that the usual practice was that a person was asked to pay the charges only after the court decided to accept a case, and that therefore the order was issued after the court had registered the case.

Last year in June, seven High Court Judges lodged a case against Judge Shareef regarding similar conduct in which the seven judges accused him of tampering with decisions made by the majority of the High Court bench.

Other claims by the seven judges included assigning cases to judges arbitrarily, discriminating between judges in assigning cases and of not correcting these issues despite repeated requests.

The case is still pending in the JSC and Minivan News understands that no action has been taken against Judge Shareef so far.

In July 2012, the High Court ordered police to investigate claims made to the Anti Corruption Commission (ACC), that Chief Judge Shareef had met officials from Malaysian mobile security solutions provider Nexbis – who was given contract to develop a border control system for the department of Immigration – in Bangkok.

Judge Shareef had returned home from a conference in Singapore after spending a week in Bangkok, where he was alleged to have met Nexbis representatives.

However, Nexbis denied that any such meeting took place, and filed a case in a bid to stop the ACC from publicly sharing information on the investigation while the matter was in court, and seeking an apology for the damage to its reputation.

Asking police to investigate the allegations made to the ACC, the High Court meanwhile stressed in a statement that “no individual Judge can simply influence a decision of the Court, as all cases in the High Court are presided by a minimum of three judges  and a ruling is only made by the majority of a particular bench.”

The accusations sent to the ACC were an “extremely irresponsible act with intentions to deceive and manipulate the truth,” the Court’s statement read.

Meanwhile, local media outlet Sun Online claimed that Judge Ahmed Shareef’s name was also included in the Judicial Reform Commission – a commission formed by presidential decree, which opponents of former President Mohamed Nasheed alleged that was to be formed to remove the existing lower courts and reappoint the judges.

However, the commission was never formed after President Nasheed suddenly and controversially resigned on February 7, 2012 which he maintains was forced.

Despite the new case filed against Judge Ahmed Shareef, no decision has been made to revoke the stay order issued by the High Court.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)