Maldives: Journalists jailed for the first time in democratic era as state intensifies media crackdown

Two journalists from digital news outlet Adhadhu were sentenced to prison on May 12 following a series of secret contempt of court hearings, marking the first time media workers have been jailed in the Maldives since the adoption of its 2008 democratic constitution. The International Federation of Journalists (IFJ) joins its affiliate, the Maldives Journalists Association (MJA), in condemning this unprecedented judicial overreach and the weaponising of state institutions to criminalise investigative journalism.

Adhadhu journalists Mohamed Shahzan (L) and Leevan Ali Naseer (R) were sentenced to 15 and 10 days in prison respectively on May 12. Credit: MJA

The Maldivian Criminal Court sentenced Adhadhu journalists Mohamed Shahzan and Leevan Ali Naseer to 15 and 10 days in prison respectively for 'violation' of a gag order imposed on May 10 in connection with the outlet's 'Aisha' documentary, which alleged sexual misconduct and abuse of power by President Mohamed Muizzu against a former employee. Leevan was also fined approximately USD 1,738 for contempt of court, with Shahzan's fine remaining unclear at this time, according to the MJA.

Shahzan, who is Vice President of the MJA, was detained for questioning President Muizzu about the allegations during a live media briefing, from which he was forcibly expelled on the President's orders, while Leevan was sentenced for reporting on the existence of the gag order itself, with a court directive accusing him of breaching restrictions by publicising judicial orders.

The contempt hearings were held behind closed doors to "uphold public morals", forbidding the prosecution and defendants from revealing details of the trial publicly. The three-judge panel only permitted the journalists a two-hour window to appoint legal counsel and rushed to conclude proceedings, according to local reports, forcing them to appear without representation.

The sentencing is the latest escalation in a state crackdown on critical reporting, following an April 27 police raid on the Adhadhu newsroom, the seizure of 20 laptops, and travel bans imposed on outlet CEO Hussain Fiyaz Moosa and editor Hassan Mohamed. The Maldives Media and Broadcasting Commission, consolidated under the controversial 2025 'media control bill', has ordered national compliance with the ban from every news outlet, while the Elections Commission has fined opposition parties for discussing the documentary's contents. The President's Office has also banned Adhadhu and its staff from all future press conferences indefinitely.

According to the MJA, the Criminal Court's gag order, grounded in the Islamic sharia principle of qazf (false accusation of adultery) under Section 612(a) of the Maldivian Penal Code, is the first to ban the public from discussing a case in its entirety. Legal experts have condemned the order as unlawful, noting that the Maldives has no statutory sub judice rule or jury system that would justify a total restriction on public speech. Former Chief Justice Ahmed Abdulla Didi stated on X that the documentary must be viewed as legitimate media content under journalistic codes of ethics and warned that the current proceedings contravene constitutional principles of public trials and freedom of expression.

The MJA said:"These attacks are the latest in a series of attempts targeted specifically to halt the critical and investigative media coverage of Adhadhu. The nexus between a highly politicised judiciary unduly influenced by an overreaching executive raises serious concerns about due process rights and fair trial rights as the state seeks to punish journalists criminally for reporting on serious allegations of abuse of power, sexual misconduct and harassment against the president."

The IFJ said: "The jailing of journalists and persecution of independent media for critical reporting in the public interest marks a dangerous escalation, and a blatant violation of international press freedom, democratic, and human rights standards. The coordination between the executive and judiciary to fast-track these cases through secret hearings represents a calculated dismantling of the legal safeguards designed to protect journalists. The IFJ stands with the MJA in calling for the convictions and draconian gag order to be immediately overturned."