The Maldives, a nation celebrated for its turquoise waters, is now grappling with a darker tide: a crisis threatening the heart of its judiciary.
The ongoing effort to dismiss Supreme Court Justices Dr. Azmiralda Zahir and Mahaz Ali Zahir have exposed deep cracks in the rule of law, raising alarms about judicial independence, political interference, and eroding public trust. As Parliament nears a vote on their removal, the Maldives faces a defining moment for justice.
The controversy began on February 26, 2025, when the Judicial Service Commission (JSC) suspended Azmiralda, Mahaz, and Justice Husnu Al Suood, citing Anti-Corruption Commission probes. The timing, hours before a Supreme Court hearing on an anti-defection amendment, suggested political motives. The JSC later recommended dismissing Azmiralda and Mahaz, alleging they unethically influenced Criminal Court judges to secure the release of Azmiralda’s husband, arrested in December 2024.
Yet, the process has been riddled with flaws. The justices deny the charges, and the implicated judges reportedly refuted any contact. The Judiciary Committee’s approval of the dismissal on May 11, without allowing the justices to defend themselves, has been slammed as a mockery of due process.
The ruling People’s National Congress (PNC), holding 73 of 93 parliamentary seats, appears poised to seal the justices’ fate. The simultaneous passage of a law reducing the Supreme Court bench from seven to five fuels suspicions of a coordinated effort to reshape the judiciary in President Mohamed Muizzu’s favor.
Posts on X warn that their removal could pave the way for loyalist appointments, securing the anti-defection amendment and entrenching PNC dominance. The opposition, Human Rights Watch, and the UN Special Rapporteur on Judicial Independence have decried this as an assault on the judiciary’s ability to check executive power.
This saga underscores profound challenges. First, judicial independence is under threat, with the JSC and Parliament acting as extensions of political will. Second, the lack of transparent hearings and defense rights violates due process, setting a dangerous precedent.
Third, public trust is crumbling. X reflects widespread skepticism, amplified by Justice Suood’s resignation and appeals to the UN. Internationally, the Maldives risks isolation as global voices condemn the erosion of democratic norms.
The likely approval of the dismissals threatens to tilt the scales of justice further. Yet, Azmiralda’s legal challenges and international pressure offer glimmers of hope.
The Maldives must act swiftly: reforming the JSC, ensuring transparent processes, and shielding judges from political retribution are urgent. Civil society and the opposition must keep demanding accountability.
The dismissal of Azmiralda and Mahaz is a litmus test for the Maldives’ democracy. A judiciary under siege cannot deliver justice. The nation must restore balance to its scales—for its people and its future.
Smile and Let Smile 