The Speaker of the Parliament, Mohamed Nasheed, has been served a notice to respond to a no-confidence motion filed by the ruling Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP).
The motion, initiated by the MDP, was submitted to the Parliament on Wednesday and has garnered the support of 56 parliament members. It accuses Nasheed of obstructing the smooth functioning of the Parliament, alleging that his actions are both illegal and contradict the fundamental principles of the Speaker’s role as the guardian of parliamentary rules.
The MDP cites several reasons for seeking the dismissal of Speaker Nasheed. Among the grievances raised is his alleged failure to reconstitute parliament standing committees, which has brought important legislative work to a halt. Additionally, Nasheed is accused of frequently leaving parliament sittings without providing a reason, which is seen as a dereliction of duty.
Furthermore, the MDP alleges that the Speaker has been supporting members who actively seek to disrupt parliamentary meetings, thereby undermining the government’s legislative agenda. It is claimed that Nasheed has participated in debates within the Parliament while presiding, a breach of protocol and impartiality expected from the Speaker.
Another point of contention highlighted in the no-confidence motion is the alleged obstruction of the no-confidence motion against Attorney General Ibrahim Riffath. The MDP claims that Nasheed intentionally impeded the proceedings, potentially leading to a parliamentary deadlock.
The upcoming parliamentary debate, scheduled to take place after the mandatory 14-day notice period, is expected to offer insights into the evolving dynamics of party politics and representation in the Maldives.
If the motion is successful and receives a majority vote, Speaker Nasheed will be removed from his position, necessitating the selection of a new speaker.
Meanwhile, in response to the motion, Speaker Nasheed has decided to temporarily recuse himself from his duties. However, this has further delayed the no-confidence motion against Vice-Speaker Eva Abdulla. According to the Parliamentary Rules of Procedure, the Speaker is mandated to chair the session if a no-confidence motion is filed against the Vice-Speaker, and vice versa.
Despite the parliamentary rules, Nasheed has refused to preside over the sitting, causing uncertainty regarding the fate of the no-confidence motion against him. The MDP parliamentarians describe Nasheed’s actions as a deliberate attempt to seize parliamentary functions in order to undermine the government.