The State shall be represented in court by AG Office in constitutional cases, rules Supreme Court

The Supreme Court has ruled that the State shall be represented in court by the Attorney General’s (AG) Office, in constitutional cases filed against the State.

This ruling came in relation to a constitutional case filed to High Court by Fuad Zahir of Mariyamge, Gaaf Alif Kolamaafushi, requesting to remove some sections from the Tax Administration Act. The court had ruled that the defendant for this case was Maldives Inland Revenue Authority (MIRA) and had given the AG Office the opportunity to intervene.

The case filed against MIRA was appealed by the former AG Office.

Supreme Court said in its ruling on Wednesday that the constitutional case was filed to request the removal of Article 29 of the Tax Administration Act, on the premise that it contradicted Article 47 (b) of the Constitution.

The Supreme Court ruling said that according to Article 16 of the Constitution, the onus of establishing that the limitation to any extent of a right or freedom, is within the reasonable limitations prescribed in the Constitution, is on the State.

The Supreme Court said that according to Article 133 (c) of the Constitution, the State shall be represented in all courts by the AG or by a person delegated by him, except for those matters deemed to be the responsibility of the Prosecutor General; and thus ruled that the AG shall represent the State in court in constitutional cases against the State.

The constitutional case filed to High Court by Fuad Zahir requested to remove Article 29 of the Tax Administration Act, which gives MIRA the power to enter premises to obtain documents as evidence.