Ali Azim's younger brother files a case to Supreme Court stating that Hassan Shiyam, who contends in Mid Henveyru Constituency with Azim does not meet the requirement for the election due to his unsettled debt.
A younger brother of the parliamentarian of Mid Henveyru Constituency, Ali Azim has lodged a complaint to Maldives Supreme Court of the Maldives stating that the independent candidate of the same Constituency, Hassan Shiyam (VB Hassan) does not meet the criteria for candidacy.
The election complaint submitted by Ilyas Ahmed of Henveyru Queen has been scheduled to begin at the Supreme Court today.
This case was brought forward claiming that Hassan has been proven to hold a debt with the court ruling passed over him on the 13th of last month regarding an appeal case lodged by Hassan.
Despite having a debt, the court had determined that Hassan could not be defined as someone who hasn't been issuing payments on his debt.
The Constitution stipulates a candidacy condition over debt holders in which they are required to routinely make payments to settle the debt regardless of having incurred one.
While the payment duration for the two loans of USD 10 million issued to Crystal Lagoon Resort on 2006 and USD 64 million disbursed on 2008 through State Bank of India (SBI) has expired, Hassan was named within the 11 guarantors provided for the loan.
SBI had filed a case with the Civil Court appealing that the guarantors of the loan must assume responsibility for it which the court had concluded with a mandate over the 11 guarantors to conclude the payment and interest of the loan together with the penalty fine within 8 months.
SBI had lodged another case with the Civil Court on the implementation of this verdict as the payment was unsettled within the given window. While procedures are being progressed on the implementation of the ruling in relation to this case, the court has been provided the permit to auction off two resorts mortgaged under the loan.
Hassan had appealed to the Civil Court to issue a verdict over SBI that the guarantors hold no proven debt to be enforced until the court has determined the additional payments owed by the guarantors after the sale of the resorts, however, the court had decided that no such order could be decreed.
With the lodging of a case to High Court regarding this decision by Hassan, High Court had also ruled that there remains no reasoning for the court to alter its ruling.
The ruling of the High Court stated that the Constitution stipulates that decrees by any court must be followed so long as the court that issued the mandate or the court that appeals the case does not issue an order to delay implementation of the court ruling.
High Court further stated that although execution of a decree over guarantors without reviewing whether the debt can be settled with the sale of the mortgage is prohibited under the rules of the Civil Procedure, this does not entail that there is no proven debt of the guarantors.
"Although Act 161 of the Civil Procedures prohibits executing a decree over guarantors for the time being without validating whether the debt can be settled once the mortgage is sold, the guarantors must be deemed to hold a debt even during this time. However, guarantors cannot be considered as not making payment for the debt accordingly with the mandate in this situation," read the ruling by the High Court.
Amid Hassan's participation in the parliamentary elections of 2016, the issue of this debt had escalated as well. He had lodged a case with the Supreme Court once Elections Commission rejected his candidacy due the debt over him. Supreme Court had concluded this case in his favor with a stating that the Commission must accept his candidacy and that there are no doubts about his meeting requirements.
Sign In
