The Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) has decided to protest if Speaker Mohamed Nasheed presides over the parliament sitting to be held for President-Elect Dr. Mohamed Muizzu to take the oath of office.
MDP MP for Hulhumale' Ali Niyaz, brother of President Ibrahim Mohamed Solih, said in a post on X: "With [Thursday's] Supreme Court judgment, if the swearing-in ceremony of the President-Elect is presided over by a chair that does not have the confidence of MPs, MDP will protest against that."
"Details of how to protest will be decided by the MDP PG [parliamentary group]," he added.
After the Supreme Court ruled in favor of the MDP over the stalled impeachment motion, a sitting has been scheduled for Sunday to proceed with the motion to remove Nasheed.
Section 205(b) of parliament's rules state that the Deputy Speaker must preside over a sitting with a decision on the impeachment of the Speaker on the agenda.
Despite a motion of no-confidence against Nasheed signed by 49 MDP MPs, Deputy Speaker Eva Abdulla and Parliament's Secretary General Fathmath Niusha attempted to prolong the process.
Proceedings stalled after the Parliament Secretariat interpreted the rules to mean that only Eva could preside over the sitting to vote on impeachment.
That decision was unconstitutional, the Supreme Court ruled on Thursday.
Sunday's sitting must take place even if Eva refuses to preside. If Nasheed is removed at the sitting, a new Speaker must be elected before President-Elect Muizzu's swearing-in ceremony.
The ceremony for Muizzu to take the oath of office will be held during a special sitting of parliament on November 17 at the Republic Square.
Contrary to the MDP's stance, the Supreme Court ruled that the swearing-in ceremony could take place even if Nasheed's impeachment is not concluded.
Section 205 of parliament's rules state that if an impeachment motion against the Speaker has been presented at a sitting of parliament, no other matter could be debated or put to a vote before concluding the motion.
As the MDP interpreted the provision, the motion to remove the Speaker must be presented first at the sitting for swearing in President-Elect Muizzu.
However, according to the Supreme Court judgment, even if Nasheed's impeachment is not concluded, parliament could carry out constitutionally-mandated tasks, such as the sitting for swearing in the new President.
"Even if a necessary circumstance arises for postponing any sitting scheduled for presenting and debating the motion placed in the agenda to remove the Speaker of Parliament from the post, the judges who heard this case determines unanimously that there is no obstacle to carry out other matters obligated by the constitution, laws and parliament's regulations," the Supreme Court judgment reads.
