High Court has overturned a decision by its Registrar refusing to accept a constitutional challenge seeking to halt gulper shark fishing in the Maldives.

The government introduced regulations in October last year permitting seasonal gulper shark fishing. In December, environmental activists Humaidha Abdul Ghafoor and Mohammed Seeneen filed a constitutional petition seeking to invalidate the regulation, arguing that it violates the Constitution.

The Registrar initially refused to accept the case against the Attorney General's Office, and an appeal against that decision was unsuccessful. The case was rejected on the basis that the gulper shark fishery plan did not constitute a law or regulation.

After the petition was refiled, the Registrar again declined to accept it. The activists appealed, and a High Court bench has now ruled that the Registrar's decision was incorrect.

The court held that the petition sufficiently explained why the gulper shark fishing regulation allegedly contravenes Article 22 of the Constitution and should therefore be accepted for consideration.

Humaidha has since refiled the constitutional case within the permitted time frame.

Under the regulation, gulper shark fishing is allowed for a maximum of seven months each year during periods announced by the government.

The rules limit licences to a maximum of 40 fishing vessels, while businesses engaged in gulper shark fishing must also obtain separate licences.

They also require sharks to be landed whole, prohibiting the removal or processing of any part of the shark before arrival at harbor. Fishing is only permitted outside atoll waters.

The decision to allow gulper shark fishing has drawn criticism from environmental groups, many of which have signed petitions calling for the ban to remain in place. They argue that maintaining the ban would help preserve the Maldives' international reputation for shark conservation and strengthen its advocacy on climate change and marine protection.