Judges’ integrity and ethics in question five years after life appointment
Data published by the JSC show there are now only 14 judges who lack the required academic qualifications. But the JSC’s performance in investigating complaints against judges remained dismal. Only 39 of 150 complaints were fully investigated in 2014.
04 Aug 2015, 9:00 AM
Five years ago, on August 4, more than a hundred judges gathered at the Supreme Court to take their oath of office. They were to be appointed for life, despite a majority lacking the basic qualification to sit as a judge. Aishath Velezinee, a member of the judicial watchdog, attempted to block the ceremony, screaming, “Don’t do this!” even as a court official began proceedings.
The chair of the Judicial Services Commission (JSC) at the time, former judge Muhthaz Fahmy, had declared Article 285, a constitutional provision requiring a re-evaluation of all sitting judges, as symbolic. Many judges who had no legal or formal education were to be reappointed. Some 20 judges up for reappointment had criminal records for crimes including sexual abuse, deception, embezzlement and assault.
“There were only a few there who would qualify as a judge even by the most fanciful imagination,” Velezinee recalled.
Despite her fervent pleas, the ceremony went ahead. Some 191 judges across the country swore their oath of office. Only six sitting judges were disqualified.
Become a member
Get full access to our archive and personalise your experience.
Already a member?
Discussion
No comments yet. Be the first to share your thoughts!
No comments yet. Be the first to join the conversation!
Join the Conversation
Sign in to share your thoughts under an alias and take part in the discussion. Independent journalism thrives on open, respectful debate — your voice matters.
