Case dismissed due to N. Atoll Council not attending court

The case submitted to the Civil Court by Noonu Atoll Council regarding the decision in the long-term leasing of N. Kendhivaru and N. Dhonaerikan'doodhoo by the government stating that it was against the law, was dismissed yesterday.

Regarding both islands, Noonu Atoll Council submitted a case against the President's Office stating that the decision from former President Ibrahim Mohamed Solih's administration to lease both islands for tourism purposes for a long period was against the Decentralization Act, along with the decision not achieving the purpose of the Act.

Nevertheless, the council did not attend the scheduled trial regarding the case. The council did not attend the hearing via video conference as well, with the council not attending the sentence hearing even after they were sent the summons after it was scheduled.

Shortly before the hearing, the lawyer representing the council informed the court that the lawyer was withdrawing from the case. The lawyer stated that this was because the agreement between the lawyer and the council had run its course, with the council needing to appoint a new lawyer to represent them.

However, the court stated that withdrawing from the case when there's such little time left is against regulations, with the council's new representative lawyer not attending the hearing either. And so, the court ruled to void the case.

Kendhivaru was leased to Damac Ocean Heights for tourism development in December 2022 under an agreement between the company and the Tourism Ministry.

The other island in the case, Dhonaerikan'doodhoo, was to be given under an MoU signed on 12th December 2017 between the government and the Abu Dhabi Fund for Development (ADFD) to build and operate the Maafaru International Airport under the cross-subsidy model.

At the time, the council had requested for an interim injunction, but was rejected by the court.

During the trial, the prosecution had said that the council had not submitted any document stating they had worked to find a peaceful solution to the issue of the council challenging the President's resolution, along with a resolution being released. The prosecution also stated that this action, as per the Decentralization Act, did not cause a loss in opportunity for both parties to discuss their differences of opinion.