Attorney general Ibrahim Riffath on Wednesday condemned a no-confidence motion filed against him by the opposition as a baseless and politically-motivated attempt to mislead the public.
The motion was submitted over the alleged loss of Maldivian territorial waters in a border dispute with Mauritius.
A new maritime boundary was demarcated between the Maldives and Chagos after the government conceded that the neighbouring archipelago belongs to Mauritius.
As the no-confidence motion proceeded during Wednesday's sitting of parliament, Riffath submitted his defence in writing.
The written response sparked disagreements among MPs and the no-confidence motion was parked to seek an advisory opinion from the Supreme Court.
Riffath noted 37 points in his response to parliament.
The interest of the Maldives was defended at the International Tribunal on the Law of the Sea (ITLOS) and the arguments with the most legal weight and benefit to the Maldives had been made in advocating with the international legal team, he said.
"In the case filed by Mauritius against the Maldives in ITLOS under the [UN Convention on the Law of the Sea] to which the Maldives is a signatory, I note that it can be seen that the stand taken by the state was a decision made in light of the relevant laws, apparent truths and how matters transpired in the dispute," Riffath said.
The MPs who proposed the motion did not show any legal basis, evidence or circumstantial evidence to say that my decision in the case was definitely against the law.
"My decision in the case filed by Mauritius to delimit its [exclusive economic zone] and continental shelf boundary was made within the bounds of the constitutional powers vested in the attorney general by article 133 of the constitution," he wrote in the response.
Riffath called on MPs to prioritize national interest and advised against misusing their powers for personal benefit.
