Attorney general defends Supreme Court purge amid fears of "state capture"

Attorney General Ahmed Usham recused himself from investigating alleged ethical breaches by Supreme Court Justice Azmiralda Zahir after she accused the government of fabricating cases as a pretext for her removal.

Usham told the media on Friday that he was no longer on a committee formed by the Judicial Service Commission to investigate suspended Justices Azmiralda and Mahaz Ali Zahir. The recusal came after Azmiralda levelled serious allegations against him in a letter sent to the JSC, the attorney general told Mihaaru.

A statement issued by Azmiralda’s lawyers on Thursday night called the judicial watchdog’s cases “circumstances manufactured without any basis or foundation to interfere with and influence the work of judges.”

The suspensions of Justices Azmiralda, Mahaz and Husnu Suood on February 26 came 10 minutes before the Supreme Court was due to resume hearings in a constitutional challenge to anti-defection rules that empowered parties to unseat lawmakers. The suspensions effectively blocked the pending judgment  as a minimum of five justices must preside over constitutional cases. 

The grounds for the disciplinary action was a notification from the Anti-Corruption Commission of a criminal investigation against the justices. But the ACC has yet to provide any information or specify the nature of the offence, Azmiralda’s lawyers noted. 

The statement denied allegations of Azmiralda exerting influence over criminal court judges to free her husband, Dr Ismail Latheef, an anaesthesiologist at IGMH, from police custody following his arrest in December in a raid of a spa suspected of operating as a brothel. 

According to media reports, the JSC questioned two criminal court judges last week. Azmiralda and Mahaz are reportedly due to appear before the JSC committee on Sunday and Monday.

A separate ethical case against the pair involves the Supreme Court summoning the High Court’s assistant registrar over the alleged withholding of documents, Dhauru reported. 

Meanwhile, on Friday, Transparency International backed calls by its Maldives chapter for President Dr Mohamed Muizzu to not ratify “unconstitutional” amendments made to the Judicature Act to reduce the Supreme Court bench from seven to five justices. 

Transparency International characterised the legal changes as “unconstitutional, made for political gain and undue influence, while eroding the rule of law, democratic principles, and the public interest,” and warned that it could “lead to state capture, where the ruling party consolidates power by weakening institutional checks.”

The anti-corruption organisation observed that democratic institutions in the Maldives have endured despite setbacks and instability since the transition to multi-party democracy in 2008. 

“The latest democratic backsliding has the potential to jeopardise years of progress in the Maldives.” the group cautioned. “The government must act to reverse these damaging policy changes for the sake of the country’s democratic future.”

The Muizzu administration has been playing defence in the wake of the widely condemned moves against the Supreme Court. On Friday, AG Usham posted statistics –which were promptly highlighted by state media – comparing disciplinary action taken against judges under the current and previous administrations.

Punishing judges over rulings or statements made in the courtroom came to an end with the change of government in November 2023, contended Usham, a former lawmaker during the Maldivian Democratic Party government.

But as an independent MP at the time, Usham voted in favour of impeaching Supreme Court justices.