MDP demands reform of JSC: Is this a joke?

August 7, 2018. It was a high-energy rally in L. Gan, attended by a large number of supporters. I was there covering the event as a journalist. That night, the presidential candidate for the then-opposition coalition, Ibrahim Mohamed Solih, made a major announcement: his government would bring significant changes to the Judicial Service Commission (JSC), the body responsible for overseeing judges. A key electoral pledge from the MDP at the time was to change the composition of the JSC to ensure it was free from political influence.

The Maldivian people gave Solih the opportunity to lead the country and deliver this, and many other such promises. Not only that, but voters hopeful for reform also gave the Solih administration a full majority in Parliament, granting them the complete power and authority to change any laws or regulations they wished. However, those five years in power concluded without any of those pledged reforms to the JSC being realized. Yet, today, the MDP has begun talking about this issue once again.

A party that was given all powers, but still failed to deliver its promises

Last Tuesday, with the claim of holding the government accountable, the opposition Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) presented 12 demands to President Dr. Mohamed Muizzu’s administration. One of these demands was a call to reform the composition of the JSC.

Many certainly found this amusing.

To view the JSC as a tool that must remain in the grip of politicians while in power, only to call for its independence once power is lost, is the height of political hypocrisy. This proves that political parties have never truly had the sincere intention to reform the judiciary.

After winning their positions by making these promises to secure votes, the MDP showed no desire to change the JSC's composition, which includes the speaker of Parliament, a member of Parliament, a presidential appointee, and the attorney general. At the time, the then-opposition People’s National Congress (PNC), who are now in power, submitted proposals to Parliament to change this, but the MDP’s supermajority threw them out. The promise made to the citizens was discarded.

The MDP did not just stop at failing to reform the JSC. During their administration, the JSC was actively used to take action against judges and remove Supreme Court justices, keeping the judiciary under the political control of the MDP.

Allegations of direct interference

Describing the "attacks" on the courts during the previous MDP administration, a former judge stated that when the party held power, they allowed no room for an independent judiciary. He highlighted a change made at the time that prevented JSC decisions regarding judicial conduct from being challenged in court.

"That was a move to make a judge's job security weaker than that of a staff member in a private company. The MDP is the party that took away that protection," he said.

He noted that interference wasn't limited to major cases but extended to minor administrative matters. For instance, despite the Constitution stating that judges must be sworn in before another judge, they began a practice where judges were sworn in before the then-President of the JSC, Hisaan Hussain.

Furthermore, he pointed out that the mandate of the Department of Judicial Administration (DJA) was taken over by the JSC, which was then controlled by an MDP majority. The department also restructured court administration, appointing "court administrators" as the heads of administration.

"These people were appointed and monitored by the JSC. Magistrates had to come to court at the times specified by these administrators. Cases would only reach the magistrate after being cleared by them. Even information regarding people in custody reached the magistrate only through these people," the former judge explained.

"This was specifically how they controlled all the magistrate courts. Since Hisaan’s tenure, politicians knew exactly what was happening with every case."

Incumbent administration also fails to meet words with action

The incumbent PNC administration also came to power with the exact same promise. President Muizzu repeatedly stated he would change the composition of the JSC. The citizens granted this government a massive supermajority as well, with over 70 seats in the 20th Parliament.

The government has shown extraordinary speed in passing its desired agenda through Parliament. While major constitutional amendments were passed within just a few hours at the President's direction, the bill to reform the JSC remains "in the drawer."

Although Attorney General Ahmed Usham has stated they will address it, the government’s actions suggest a reluctance to close the door on judicial influence. When the Constitution can be changed overnight for other matters, the delay in freeing the JSC raises serious questions about their true intentions. The rhetoric used so loudly while in opposition seems to have been forgotten.

A cycle of deception

The biggest damage from the "double-faced" policies maintained by political parties regarding the JSC is suffered by ordinary citizens and the quest for a fair justice system. One could argue that the JSC is being kept in its current state specifically to maintain influence over the judiciary. This is the clearest evidence that there is no sincerity in the words and promises of politicians.

Citizens are no longer interested in excuses. They want a specific date for when the Parliament—where the government holds a supermajority—will pass the bill to change the JSC’s composition and remove politicians from the commission. The day that bill is submitted and passed will be the true measure of political sincerity. Until then, talk of reforming the JSC remains a mere "mirage" used to capture power.

For the MDP to demand JSC reform now is nothing short of a massive joke. It is a mistake to assume the Maldivian people are forgetful or that they don't remember how the party acted when they held the reins. This call for reform isn't born of good intentions; history shows that if they were to regain power, they would likely fail to act yet again.