Kulhudhuffushi-south MP Mohamed Nasheed has said the Supreme Court does not have the jurisdiction to pass the two orders it issued against the Parliament yesterday.

The first order issued by the Supreme Court yesterday ordered the Parliament to halt all proceedings regarding cases which involve secret voting, until the court passes a ruling on the legality of the motion passed recently by the Parliament to amend the Parliament regulations to establish secret balloting for votes taken at the Parliament on no-confidence motions.

The second order on the Parliament was to halt all proceedings regarding the appointment of a new member to the Civil Service Commission, until the Supreme Court passes a ruling on the case on the dismissal of the Commission President Mohamed Fahmy Hassan.

In his blog “mnasheed.com”, Nasheed said that clause 88 (b) of the constitution states that, unless specified otherwise in this constitution, the validity of any proceedings in the People’s Majlis shall not be questioned in any court of law.

“What I have to say regarding the two orders is that the Supreme Court does not have the authority to issue them. All the more, the court does not even have the authority to accept these two cases. Clause 88 (b) of the constitution states that, unless otherwise specified in this Constitution, the validity of any proceedings in the People’s Majlis shall not be questioned in any court of law,” Nasheed wrote in his blog.

He said that the constitution clearly states the instances in which a decision of the Parliament may be filed to the Supreme Court or High Court.

A clear example is that the constitution states that the Supreme Court shall have sole and final jurisdiction to determine all disputes concerning the removal of the President by the Parliament, says Nasheed.

Another example he says, is the clause in the constitution which states that any question concerning vacating of the seat of a member of the Parliament shall be determined by the Supreme Court.

He also pointed out that the constitution clearly states that the Supreme Court and the High Court shall have jurisdiction to enquire into and rule on the constitutional validity of any piece of legislature passed by the Parliament.

“This means that, proceedings of cases taken up by the Parliament of which they have absolute jurisdiction cannot be enquired into by the courts. They cannot be challenged or appealed. As long as the Majlis decides not to change it, the decision is final,” writes Nasheed.

Nasheed also said that he believes that the purpose of clause 88 (b) of the constitution is to close all avenues by which a decision of the Parliament may be changed.

He said that if taking the decision of the Parliament to the Supreme Court becomes common practice, the Supreme Court will turn into an appeal court which presides over the Parliament.

Nasheed said that clause 88 (b) of the constitution is clear and that if this becomes the norm, it would not be possible to believe that such decisions are according to the spirit and ideas of the constitution.