(Photo: File, GSM News )
Malé City, Maldives, 17 May 2025 –, GSM News:
The Maldives recently passed Gang and Organized Crime Prevention Act which has sparked serious concern over civil liberties and the rule of law. While intended to combat organized crime, the legislation shifts the burden of proof onto individuals and allows sweeping police powers based on suspicion rather than evidence.
Key issues include:
- Broad Definitions
- Erosion of Due Process
- Detention Without Legal Access
- Asset Seizure Without Conviction
- Surveillance Expansion
The Structure and Reach of the Bill
The bill begins by setting out a definition of gangs under Clause 8. A gang, according to the legislation, is any group of three or more people engaged in organized criminal activity. This basic definition would not normally raise alarm. However, subclause (b) of Clause 8 introduces a much broader category of suspicion. It states that anyone using a symbol or emblem associated with a gang is presumed to be a gang member unless proven otherwise.
This clause reverses the burden of proof, placing the obligation on the accused to prove they are not part of a gang. This violates the presumption of innocence which is a core guarantee under both Article 51(h) of the Maldivian Constitution and international human rights law, particularly Article 14(2) of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR).
Clause 11: Symbols, Expression and Criminalisation
Clause 11 expands the scope of criminal liability by defining what counts as a gang symbol or emblem. These include names, drawings, mottos, writings, seals and logos. In effect, any expressive material that suggests participation in or support of a gang can be criminalised under this clause.
This presents a significant risk to freedom of expression and association as protected by Articles 27 and 30 of the Maldivian Constitution. Similar protections are guaranteed under Articles 19 and 22 of the ICCPR. The vagueness of what qualifies as a “symbol” and the lack of intent required to be held liable under this clause could lead to people being criminalised for what they wear, post or associate with, even without any actual involvement in criminal activity.
Suspicion-Based Policing Without Oversight
A particularly alarming portion of the bill appears from Section 40 onward. These provisions hand the Maldives Police Service extraordinary powers, allowing them to take action based on suspicion alone, without a warrant or judicial oversight.
- Section 40 authorises police to search premises and arrest individuals based on suspicion.
- Section 46 allows secret operations, including placing undercover officers and conducting surveillance.
- Section 52 permits detaining suspects without access to legal counsel for up to 48 hours.
- Section 53 allows for holding individuals without bail.
- Section 56 enables restrictions on movement and social interaction.
- Sections 59 to 70 reinstate electronic ankle monitoring devices.
These measures introduce a regime of policing built on subjective thresholds. There is no requirement for a judicial warrant in most cases. The Constitution of the Maldives provides for safeguards against arbitrary arrest and unlawful searches in Articles 44 and 49, and guarantees access to legal counsel in Article 52. This bill undermines all three.
Breach of Domestic and International Law
In several instances, the Gang and Organized Crime Prevention Bill conflicts with constitutional rights and international legal obligations.
Key violations include:
- Reversal of burden of proof, violating the right to be presumed innocent.
- Denial of legal representation for 48 hours, infringing due process rights.
- Broad permission for search, arrest and surveillance without judicial oversight.
- Criminalisation of symbols, which infringes freedom of expression and association.
Internationally, the Maldives is party to the ICCPR. Articles 9 and 14 of this covenant establish protections against arbitrary detention, the right to a fair trial and legal representation, and the right to privacy. The new legislation falls short on all counts.
A Law Built on Feelings Rather Than Facts
The language of the law repeatedly uses vague terms like “suspicion” or “association” instead of requiring concrete evidence. This creates an enforcement structure based on assumption and discretion rather than accountability and proof.
This kind of subjective policing framework could easily be weaponised against political opponents, protestors, and marginalised communities. Without the requirement of a warrant or independent oversight, it is difficult to see how these provisions will not be abused in practice.
Citizens Fearful of Loss of Freedom
There is no question that gang violence and organized crime must be addressed seriously. But the current approach taken by the Gang and Organized Crime Prevention Bill comes at too high a cost. By disregarding constitutional protections, violating international legal standards, and empowering the police without adequate safeguards, the Maldives has taken a step toward a legal environment ruled by suspicion and unchecked authority.
Security should never come at the expense of liberty. Without reform, this law risks doing more harm than good to the fabric of Maldivian democracy
