JSC in contempt of court for attempting to influence ongoing proceedings, say lawyers

In a press statement issued yesterday, the JSC claimed that criticism of the judiciary by any individual or group could “pave the way for a [pervasive] spirit of not bowing to the constitution and legal judgments [among the public].”

“And making such statements could completely destroy the constitutional and legal system established in this country through the hard work of the Maldivian people while in its infancy and pave the way for disagreement and quarrel, division and discord, in the entire country,” it reads. “Therefore, the commission urges all parties not to make such statements or commit any action that could undermine the dignity and eminence of the courts.”

The JSC’s statement comes after the Supreme Court reprimanded President’s Advisor Ibrahim ‘Ibra’ Ismail last week for calling on the public to “rise up and sort out the judges” at a Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) rally on September 2 in Kaafu Thulusdhoo.

The Supreme Court claimed that Ibra’s remarks encouraged “the illegal curtailment of the tasks of the judiciary” and could lead to “the loss of peace and security of the Maldivian state and plunge the nation into unrest”.

Prior to the Supreme Court issuing its statement, the JSC conducted “an emergency meeting” and decided to ask police to investigate Ibra’s remarks.

Ibra’s remarks came after the Criminal Court barred journalists from observing the corruption trial of Deputy Speaker Ahmed Nazim on August 25.

“Judges are issuing verdicts any way they please. The effort we have to make against this is not inconsiderable. It was citizens who came out and ousted Maumoon from power. The matter of judges too can only be sorted out by citizens rising up,” Ibra, former Male’ MP and first elected president of MDP, was quoted as saying in newspaper Haveeru.

Ibra told Minivan News last week that his remarks did not constitute a criminal offence and he strongly criticised the Supreme Court for considering themselves “above the law or a law unto themselves.”

Former President’s member on the JSC and outspoken whistle-blower, Aishath Velezinee, told Minivan News that Supreme Court Justice Adam Mohamed had in his capacity as JSC Chair asked that police investigate Ibra, and then had the Supreme Court issue its statement.

“What are the police going to do? It sounds like the highest court in the land has already issued its verdict,” she said.

Both the JSC and the Supreme Court in its respective statements referred to article 141(c) of the constitution, which states: “No officials performing public functions, or any other persons, shall interfere with and influence the functions of the courts.”

Ibra however pointed out that he did not “say anything about an ongoing case” that could be construed as either undue influence or interference.

A group of lawyers meanwhile filed a case against the JSC at the Civil Court last week contesting the legality of the commission’s evaluation criteria for selecting judges to superior courts.

The group of lawyers, represented by Ali Hussein and Ismail Visham, contended that regulations drafted by the JSC containing the evaluation criteria conflicted with both the constitution and article 15 of the Judges Act. The lawyers requested that the regulations be abolished and the shortlist be cancelled.

In addition, the lawyers claimed that two shortlisted candidates had close ties with two members of the commission – the spouse of Judge Abdulla Didi and business partner of Lawyer’s Representative Ahmed Rasheed – suggesting a clear conflict of interest as neither had recused themselves from voting in the JSC panel.

The lawyers explained at a press briefing on Thursday that the evaluation criteria was skewed to favour graduates of the Islamic College by awarding higher marks for Kulliya certificates.

At the first hearing on Thursday night, the Civil Court granted a temporary injunction ordering the JSC to halt the appointment process pending a final ruling.

The JSC responded with a press statement insisting that the process was legitimate and constitutional.

Following the Civil Court order, the JSC held a meeting on Friday and decided to appeal the court order at the High Court.

Prompted by the JSC’s two press statements in the past three days, the group of lawyers sent a letter to the commission today arguing that while the constitution assured the court’s dignity and respect, “in past years the commission has not acted in a way that upholds the dignity and eminence assured by the constitution.”

The “respect and dignity assured by the constitution” is not intended only for the courts, the lawyers noted.

Moreover, the lawyers argued that the JSC issuing two press statements in the space of three days was an “attempt to unduly influence judicial proceedings” since the case was ongoing at the Civil Court.

“Contempt of court is a rule applied against any attempts to influence the process of an ongoing court case,” the letter explained. “This is a crime under provisions 86, 87 and 88 of the Maldivian penal code.”

Moreover, the lawyers argued that the JSC’s actions obstructed a right guaranteed by article 42 of the constitution to every citizen regarding “justice, transparency and impartiality” of all judicial proceedings.

“Therefore, if the commission has planned to do anything that could influence the ongoing case, stop such efforts immediately,” the letter concludes. “And if it is not stopped, we will be forced to take legal action again.”

Representative for the lawyers suing the JSC, Abdul Hameed Abdul Kareem, told Minivan News today that the JSC was looking for a lawyer to appeal the court order.

“All prominent lawyers support this cause, providing assistance in different forms,” he said.