Why is there an outcry in Maldives after new media law?

Maldives has ratified a new media law – and journalists and the Opposition are up in arms.

President Mohamed Muizzu gave his assent to the law, which allows journalists and media outlets to be fined heavily or even shuttered. This comes despite the opposition calling for protests against the law and journalists’ groups warning that it could be used to harass and intimidate the media.

Muizzu’s government has claimed that the law only seeks to establish a central body to oversee broadcast and online media and to “safeguard the constitutional right to freedom of expression”.

But what do we know about the law? Why is there an outcry in Maldives? Let’s take a closer look.

What do we know?

The law is known as the Maldives Media and Broadcasting Regulation Act. It passed parliament last week by an overwhelming majority.
It dissolves the Maldives Media Council (MMC) and Maldives Broadcasting Commission (BroadCom) and creates the Media and Broadcasting Commission.

The country’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs said the bill aimed to “create a unified regulatory framework by dissolving the Maldives Media Council and the Broadcasting Commission, replacing them with a new Media and Broadcasting Commission”.

More from Explainers

Nepal’s Gen Z protests have more to them than meets the eye Why did the youth in Nepal explode in such a rage? A psychoanalytical explanation

It calls for a commission to be established that will oversee the media. The commission will comprise seven members – three appointed by parliament and four chosen by registered media groups. Maldives’ parliament has the power to remove all the members.

It mandates that journalists must respect the nation’s constitution, Islam, national security, public order, social values, and protect personal honour and human rights. The committee, under the law, has been given power to investigate any alleged offences by journalists. It also grants the commission wide-ranging powers to fine, suspend and close outlets. Individual journalists can be fined up to USD 1,620 (Rs 142,787) while media companies can be penalised as much as USD 6,485 (Rs 571,779).

It allows authorities to suspend media licences and file legal notices asking for media licences to be cancelled even if investigations are ongoing. Police can be ordered to halt broadcasts if they are thought to violate the new law.

Editor’s Picks

1

Will ‘sinking’ islands like Maldives exist once the seas take over their land? 2

After PM Modi’s Maldives visit, will Indian tourists return to the island nation?

The law also reportedly calls for those who publish ‘false’ or ‘misleading’ information to correct it and apologise. However, what constitutes ‘fake news’ is not clearly defined.

An earlier version of the bill gave the president the right to appoint three commission members.

The law was passed in controversial circumstances by Muizzu’s People’s National Congress (PNC) and its allies. The PNC did so amid protests at an extraordinary session of parliament, which had been in recess. Deputy Speaker Ahmed Nazim gave the green light to the vote after ousting seven opposition legislators from the House for protesting the bill.

An opposition MP claimed that legislators were provided the bill at 5:15 pm – giving them just 15 minutes to read it before the debate began. Nazim reportedly claimed that normal procedural rules were not applicable during a special session of parliament.

Of the 93 members of the Maldives’ parliament, known officially as the People’s Majlis of Maldives, 60 voted for the bill. Just one opposition MP, from the Maldives Development Alliance, voted against the bill. The PNC and its allies have a combined 79 seats in parliament. Muizzu came to power in 2023 on an anti-India campaign with a supermajority in parliament.

This occurred as protests outside parliament saw demonstrators face off with police wearing riot gear. Two people were arrested and then later released, according to local media. Journalists were also not allowed to cover the proceedings inside parliament. Maldives Journalists Association (MJA) president General Naaif Ahmed and former executive member Muzayin Nazim were reportedly removed from parliament’s 10 September session.

Why is there an outcry?

Media rights groups have accused the government of waging a war on press freedom.

A number of groups including the International Federation of Journalists (IFJ) and its affiliate, the MJA, have slammed the government and called the law ‘draconian’.

“The Maldivian parliament has passed a draconian bill that seeks to muzzle dissent online and offline, both on traditional media and social media,” Ahmed Naaif, the secretary general of the MJA, told Al Jazeera.

“We journalists will stand together in defiance against this takeover of the media by the executive branch,” he added. Ahmed earlier told The Hindu that Muizzu’s campaign was riddled with “disinformation, including about Indian military presence”.

“The government does not want media outlets to ask difficult questions about the economy or about its continuing relationship with India. They wish to control the narrative by curbing media freedom,” he said.

The MJA, in a statement after the bill was passed, accused the Muizzu government of having “voted to muzzle the press”.

“Journalists stand together in defiance of this takeover of the media by the executive branch. MJA continues our call to reject the Bill and calls on President Muizzu to immediately reject this unconstitutional Bill,” it added.

They have also accused the government of conducting a smear campaign against journalists and inciting violence against the media. The Committee to Protect Journalists warned that the law poses a “grave threat to press freedom and media independence”. It noted how it was passed by parliament despite protests from local journalists. It said the development would “undermine the work of independent journalists and place the media under government control”.

Opposition members have also taken the government to task. The opposition Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) called the parliament’s move a “sad day for democracy in the Maldives”. It asked the public to “join us to protest this draconian control bill”.

Abdulla Shahid, ex-foreign minister and former president of the UNGA, said the government was “declaring war” on free speech.

“A government that silences journalists is a government that has lost the courage to face the truth. Instead of fixing the crises our nation faces, they are trying to censor the voices that hold them accountable,” Shahid wrote on X.

Ex-president Ibrahim Mohamed Solih said that it “signifies the end of press freedom in Maldives” and that the “underhanded manner in which it was forced through parliament, despite protests by journalists, opposition parties, media organisations, civil society, and the public, lays bare the government’s disregard for Maldivians’ democratic rights”.

But the government remains unmoved.

“Personal social media accounts used in a private capacity are not regulated under this legislation,” Foreign Minister Abdulla Khaleel wrote on X. Khaleel said the law will establish “clear standards and a code of conduct” and will also “address the challenges of misinformation, disinformation and coordinated manipulation of content”.

Maldives, known as a high-end tourist destination of just 500,000 people, has a short democratic history. It has had a difficult transition since becoming a multiparty democracy in 2008, ending 30 years of autocratic rule.

With inputs from agencies