Parliament sitting concluded without finishing all agenda items

Parliament, on Wednesday, concluded its sitting within one and a half hours without finishing all items on the agenda.

As usual, the parliamentary sitting kicked off at 9:00am. The first matter on Wednesday’s agenda was an emergency motion submitted by Vaikaradhoo MP Hussain Ziyadh regarding the lack of facilities to weigh yellowfin tuna catches, as a result of which over 120 tons of yellowfin tuna are currently on the verge of spoilage.

He had submitted the emergency motion to bring the issue to the attention of the government.

The emergency motion was accepted by the votes of 40 lawmakers and subsequently proceeded for debate.

After the time allocated for the debate had run out, the Parliament proceeded with the next item on the agenda: the debate on the bill to amend Judges Act submitted by North Thinadhoo MP Saudhulla Hilmy.

Two hours and seven minutes were left of the four hours allocated for the debate.

At 10:30am, in the midst of the debate, Speaker Abdulla Abdul Raheem cut off the speaker of North Henveiru MP Aifan.

The Speaker acknowledged that an important debate was ongoing, adding that the interruption did not mark the end of the debate.

“This is the time we go for a recess. For your information, I note that this is not the conclusion of the debate and it will proceed later. The next parliamentary sitting will be held on July 7, 2025, at 9:00am. This is the end of [today’s] sitting,” he said.

The parliamentary session wrapped up in just an hour and a half, leaving some agenda items pending. They included debate on matters put forth by committees and votes. 

Notably, there has been significant concern surrounding frequent cancellations of parliamentary sittings, especially since the end of Eid al-Fitr holidays.

Parliament’s standing orders dictate that sittings must be held three days per week. Usually, these sittings are held on Monday, Tuesday and Wednesday.

However, committee works have been proceeding regularly.

The public has always scrutinized the high salaries of lawmakers, citing that they do not perform work that justifies the high salary and other benefits they receive.