The Attorney General’s Office has raised concerns over the constitutionality of an amendment to the Rules of Procedure in the Parliament, specifically related to the process of impeaching the President. According to the Attorney General’s interpretation, the amendment is deemed unconstitutional.
As per the Constitution, the removal of the President from office requires a two-thirds majority vote from the total number of Members of Parliament. However, the rules were modified last year, excluding vacancies from the overall count. This adjustment, currently under scrutiny, introduces the possibility of impeaching the President with just a single vote from members of the Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP), as seven parliamentary seats remain vacant.
Seizing this opportunity, the MDP has submitted a motion to impeach President Dr. Mohamed Muizzu. In response, the Attorney General’s Office has taken legal action, filing a petition in the Supreme Court seeking the annulment of the contentious amendment. The statement released by the office asserted that the amendment goes against constitutional principles and is beyond the Parliament’s authority.
The Supreme Court is now tasked with the decision of whether to accept the petition. The outcome of this legal challenge will have significant implications for the impeachment process and the constitutional framework governing such proceedings. The case remains pending, awaiting the Supreme Court’s deliberation on the constitutionality of the contested amendment.