Court asked to bar three MPs from parliament sessions

Attorney Mohamed Waheed Ibrahim (Wadde’) has asked the Supreme Court to make a decision regarding the validity of the decisions made by the parliament with the attendance and participation of Kaashidhoo PM Abdulla Jabir, Henveyru-south MP Hamid Abdul Gafoor and Hithadhoo-central MP Mohamed Rasheed.

He made this request during a hearing held today, of a case submitted by Ahmed Siddheeq of Gaafu Dhaal Fiyoree Aisaadharuge and Ibrahim Hussain of Dhaftharu number 3569, asking the Supreme Court to declare that the decision made by the parliament to hold votes in secret, is against the constitution.

Waheed asked the court to determine the validity of the decision made by the parliament with the participation of the MP Jabir and MP Hamid, cases for both of whom are currently with the Prosecutor General pending prosecution, and also with the participation of MP Mohamed Rasheed, who currently carries terrorism charges against him.

Advocating that votes taken in the parliament cannot be made secret, Waheed said that the decision was made against the spirit of the constitution. He also said that the participation of Henveyru-central MP Ali Azim and Alifushi MP Mohamed Nashiz, who currently have a Civil Court ruling upon them to repay a debt, is also a reason why the parliament decision to hold votes in secrets is invalid.

Waheed has also requested for rulings to bar Azim and Nashiz from parliament sessions.

In answer to Waheed’s arguments, Counsel General of the Parliament Fathimath Filza said that the members have the right to attend parliament meetings as long as a court does not issue a ruling in this regard.

Waheed said that Article 85 of the constitution states that a parliament session, or part of a parliament session, may only conducted in secret on two instances, and they are in the interests of public order or national security, where a majority of those present and voting of the members of the People’s Majlis may decide to exclude the public and the press from all or any part of the proceedings.

Counsel General Filza said that the constitution also allows, apart from the instances stated in article 85 of the constitution, for the parliament to include in its regulations instances where secret voting maybe established. She also asked the court to declare that the decision made by the parliament to conduct votes in secret to be valid, stating that the decision by the parliament to conduct secret voting is in accordance to the constitution.

Waheed said that, in reference to the case where the Supreme Court supported a decision made by the Criminal court against former Kaashidhoo MP Ismail Abdul Hameed, an MP cannot attend the parliament meeting starting from the instance were a conviction is made by a court. Waheed said that in the case MP Azim and MP Nashiz, the Civil Court has made a conviction against both MPs and while there is no possibility for decision be further appealed, the MPs do not have the capacity to attend parliament meetings.

Concluding today’s trial, Chief Justice Ahmed Faiz Hussain said that Waheed will be allowed to continue his statement in the next hearing, as his argument has not been closed.