High Court rules it cannot dismiss case against Gayoom concerning DRP debt

High Court has ruled that it cannot dismiss the case submitted by Maldives Transport and Contracting Company (MTCC) against former President and then leader of Dhivehi Rayyithunge Party (DRP) Maumoon Abdulla Gayoom claiming that he must take responsibility for the debts of the party.

The case by MTCC was initially submitted to the Civil Case, appealing for the court to rule that Gayoom, as then leader of the party, must take responsibility for the debts DRP had when it was dissolved. When the party was dissolved for failing to have the requisite number of members, it had an outstanding amount of MVR 1.1 million in payments due to MTCC for various services rendered.

However, the Civil Court ruled in 2023 that it could not issue an order on Gayoom to settle this payment.

MTCC then appealed the case at the High Court.

Legal representatives of Gayoom raised a procedural point in court, claiming that the case cannot be proceeded against him. The reason they cited for this is that when the original case surrounding DRP's debts proceeded in Civil Court, no charges were pressed against Gayoom.

They appealed to the High Court to rule it cannot proceed with the case against Gayoom, and to review MTCC's actions and order them to pay compensation to Gayoom.

However, it was decided through the majority of the High Court's judges' bench today that there is no legal obstruction inhibiting the submission of an appeal against a person who may not be a direct defendant in a lower court's case. The court's ruling further stated that as MTCC had built a legal argument against Gayoom not having to bear responsibility for DRP's debts, this is sufficient to submit an appeal against Gayoom.

Hence, the ruling said that Gayoom is not required to be answerable to some of the points noted in the case's appeal. However, the court granted Gayoom a period of 20 days to present a response on the point concerning taking responsibility for DRP's debt.

The decision was reached through the majority by High Court's Judge Fathimath Faruhiza and Judge Hussain Mazeed.

Judge Dheebanaaz Fahmy's stand, meanwhile, differed. She was of the thought that the case must be rejected, and that MTCC must pay MVR 75,000 in compensation to Gayoom.

Judge Dheebanaaz Fahmy maintained that MTCC had submitted the case to High Court without sufficient justifiable reason, with the intention of harassing an individual, and in an attempt to make undue use of the court system.