14 May 2026
Transparency Maldives expresses grave concern over the rapid deterioration of civic space in the Maldives. Since our statement on 29 April 2026, in which we raised alarm over the raid on Adhadhu News and the serious procedural violations committed during that search, the situation has deteriorated in ways that demand urgent public attention. The continued targeting of independent media outlets, coupled with escalating restrictions on press freedom, represents a dangerous erosion of democratic norms and fundamental rights in the Maldives.
For the first time in the democratic history of the Maldives, journalists have been imprisoned. Proceedings at the Criminal Court were conducted in secret. A court order now prohibits the public from discussing allegations against a sitting head of state. These are not isolated incidents: they reflect a broader and accelerating pattern of institutional action against civic freedoms.
Key Concerns
Due process and the right to a fair trial: Providing journalists with only two hours to secure legal representation before hearings that resulted in custodial sentences is a serious breach of Article 51 of the Constitution. Without counsel, they were unable to present any meaningful defense. Conducting those hearings in secret removes any public check on their fairness. Procedural rights are not formalities — they are the basis on which the legitimacy of judicial outcomes rests.
The constitutionality of the gag order: The Constitution guarantees fundamental rights and freedoms under Chapter 2, which may only be limited by a law enacted by the People’s Majlis and only where such limitations are demonstrably justified in a free and democratic society. A gag order cannot be used to restrict constitutional freedom in the absence of such a legal basis. An order that bars even indirect discussion of allegations against a public official—and has resulted in the imprisonment of journalists for a question posed at a press conference and for reporting on the order itself—raises serious concerns as to whether these constitutional requirements are being met. Its practical effect risks shielding judicial action from public scrutiny, undermining transparency and accountability.
Actions across multiple institutions impacting independent media: The executive, judiciary, and the Maldives Media and Broadcasting Commission (MMBC) have each taken actions that, in combination, systematically narrow the space for independent journalism. Measures such as regulatory restrictions, criminal sanctions, and administrative penalties may be viewed individually in isolation, but in combination they create an environment that limits press freedom and public scrutiny. This pattern raises serious concerns about the ability of these institutions to operate independently and uphold fundamental rights.
Broader restrictions of the Civic Space: These developments occur alongside restrictions on assembly during political protests and other limitations on civic expression. While these are legally distinct issues, they reflect a broader environment in which the space for civic expression is narrowing. The cumulative effect is a chilling impact on public participation and expression across different areas of public life.
International obligations: The Maldives has binding obligations under the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), including protections for freedom of expression under Article 19 and the right to a fair trial under Article 14. Recent measures, particularly the imposition of the gag order and the lack of adequate time for legal representation, raise serious concerns about compliance with these obligations and the erosion of fundamental rights.
Transparency Maldives Calls For:
- The immediate release of the imprisoned journalists pending an independent review of proceedings for compliance with due process guarantees.
- The immediate release of all individuals detained during recent protests, the removal of restrictions placed on media coverage of those protests, and full respect for the right to peaceful assembly as guaranteed under Article 32 of the Constitution.
- A review of the constitutionality and proportionality of the gag order with regard to whether it has a valid legal basis under the Constitution and in light of Articles 27 and 28 of the Constitution and ICCPR Article 19.
- The lifting of the administrative ban on Adhadhu journalists from presidential press conferences. Access to public accountability forums cannot be conditioned on the outcome of pending criminal proceedings.
- That all ongoing proceedings be conducted in open court, with full access to legal representation from the outset, as a constitutional requirement.
- A public account from the Maldives Media and Broadcasting Commission on the legal basis for its regulatory decisions in this case.
- That the government reaffirms through concrete action, not statements alone — its commitment to press freedom, freedom of assembly, and freedom of expression as guaranteed under the Constitution and international law.
Transparency Maldives will continue to monitor these developments and engage with local and international partners in defense of the civic and democratic space that Maldivians have built since 2008.
– ENDS –