The Maldivian judiciary has come under fire after it requested the parliamentary budget review committee to increase the funds allocated for the judiciary in the State Budget 2019.
The Department of Judicial Administration (DJA) was summoned to a meeting with the budget committee on Tuesday night, to discuss the request to increase funds for independent institutions. DJA's explanation for requesting a higher budget was met with harsh criticism from nearly all the members of the budget review committee.
The lawmaker most critical of DJA's request was member of ruling coalition leader Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) and Kulhudhuffushi MP Abdul Ghafoor Moosa. He slammed the "unjust" practices of the Maldivian judiciary, highlighting the issue of political detainees as a key example.
Ghafoor noted that high profile politicians, who in the previous government were arrested and convicted "unlawfully" as the now ruling coalition maintains, remained incarcerated until the new President Ibrahim Mohamed Solih came into power. Emphasising the abruptness with which the detainees were released, Ghafoor demanded whether that was "the justice of today".
"I'm embarrassed to speak of increasing the salaries or allowances of parliamentarians in front of the people today. Similarly, I'm embarrassed to ask for more funds for [the judiciary] while we spend the people's money but they are not receiving justice."
He concurred that the judiciary needed more funds for its functioning, but asserted that the lack of justice ensured for the people was a major cause for concern.
Ghafoor's comments were met with some surprise by members of opposition Progressive Party of Maldives (PPM). However, PPM lawmakers' questions for DJA were also raised with much criticism.
Gahdhoo MP Ahmed Rasheed of PPM highlighted that the courts expedited the trials of certain individuals, while cases of the common people were often put on hold. He stated that it should not be only politicians' cases that are solved quickly, while the trials of civilians are dragged out over several years.
While almost all of the members of the budget review committee had posed several questions to DJA, the majority of the inquiries concerned judges and magistrates. Hence, the representatives of DJA had declined to answer.
Sign In