The Civil Court Monday warned Attorney General Mohamed Anil of contempt action over the his decision to appeal the court imposed two year media ban imposed on former staff the now defunct Haveeru newspaper.
Civil Court concluded a legal dispute over the ownership of the country’s oldest newspaper Haveeru and associated media, barring all employees of Haveeru Media Group from working at any media outlet in the country for two years.
The AG office last week had announced its decision to appeal based on the order to the authorities to enforce the ban which it said was clearly in violation of the constitution.
“The home ministry nor any other state institution has the legal authority to prevent any individual from being employed anywhere of his or her choosing,” the statement in local language Dhivehi had read.
AG office had also noted that the court had clearly denied the ex-Haveeru staff as a third party in the case to have a say which was in violation of the constitution and “Audi alteram partem.”
In a strongly worded statement, the court warned that the AG would be held in contempt if he continued to encourage defiance of court rulings.
The statement also accused the AG preferential treatment in the case.
The court also insisted that the AG had no authority to nullify court verdicts and reminded him that he was obligated to enforce court verdicts until they are overturned by a higher court.
The latest warning comes after the court had reprimanded the AG for saying that the home ministry, by law would not be able to take any action against the Haveeru staff despite the court order.
“As far as I can see this a civil case. So the defendant has the right for appeal. But as the home ministry is now involved, all I can tell you is that in light of the constitution and the laws, we [home ministry] cannot take any action against the staff even if they work for any other media organisation,” Anil had said earlier.
However, in a fresh ruling, the civil court countered the Attorney General’s statement ruling that it was null and void.
“All state institutions are obligated to comply and immediately enforce a court ruling until it is overruled by a higher court,” the ruling read.
Meanwhile, Over 30 staff formerly employed by Haveeru had filed an appeal of the verdict at the High Court citing that the verdict clearly violated constitutional rights.
The case had also voiced concern over the civil court’s blatant disregard to the employee contracts made with Haveeru which had no clause barring its staff from working for other media outlets.
The verdict has been widely regarded as an attempt to close the Mihaaru newspaper launched by the staff following the forced closure of Haveeru.
The two year ban on Mihaaru journalists was imposed in the final verdict of the ownership lawsuit who worked for Haveeru from February this year.
The judge invoked a maxim in Islamic jurisprudence on preventing damage to justify the ban.
He also ordered the home ministry, the broadcasting commission, and other state institutions to take action against former staff working at other media organisations within seven days upon request by the majority shareholders.
Sign In
