The case argued that this practice, which has resulted in de facto moratorium on the death penalty since 1953, violates Article 10(b)) of the constitution which states “no law contrary to any tenet of Islam shall be enacted in the Maldives.”

Those submitting the case have argued that Sharia gives the right to pardon a convict lies solely with the victim’s heirs.

The case specifically mentioned the two people convicted of the murder of Ahmed Najeeb, a prominent lawyer, on July 1. This murder, the seventh in the country this year, has sparked a national debate on the application of the death penalty.

Ahmed Murrath and Fathimath Hana, aged 29 and 18, confessed to the murder and were sentenced to death after Najeeb’s heirs unanimously called for qisas (equal retaliation) rather than opting for blood money.

Today’s submission argues that the president’s power to commute these sentences violates the rights of the heirs and renders pointless the taking of their statements in order to determine sentencing.