The Bar Council of Maldives (BCM) has emphasized the need for substantial revisions to the proposed Maldives Media & Broadcasting Regulation Bill, recently passed by Parliament’s Committee on Independent Institutions. The Council stated that the legislation must better align with constitutional principles and international standards.
In a post shared on X, BCM confirmed that it has formally submitted its comments to the People’s Majlis regarding the bill.
“In line with the Legal Reform and Research Commission’s (LRRC) recommendations, the Bill requires significant reconsideration to ensure compliance with the Constitution and international best practices,” the Bar Council said.
The Bar Council has urged Parliament to engage in meaningful consultations with stakeholders and allow sufficient time for public feedback before enacting the bill. Officials emphasized that such discussions are essential to avoid measures that could unintentionally restrict press freedom.
Journalists have consistently protested the bill, warning that it could impose “alarmingly narrow” restrictions on media operations. Their concerns come amid proposed amendments submitted by the Attorney General (AG), which include removing a controversial clause that would have allowed fines against individual journalists and media personnel.
Despite the AG’s proposals, the Parliamentary committee meeting reviewing these recommendations was held behind closed doors, leaving unclear which, if any, of the suggested changes were incorporated into the final bill.
The committee passed the legislation, reportedly with unanimous support from PNC MPs, even as journalists staged protests outside the meeting venue.
The controversy surrounding the bill highlights a growing tension between government authorities and the media. Observers note that the absence of transparent stakeholder consultations may undermine public trust and raise concerns about potential restrictions on journalistic practice.
The Bar Council and media groups continue to call for careful deliberation, warning that hurried enactment could conflict with both constitutional safeguards and international standards on freedom of expression.
