Maldives: Government ignores UN recommendations with passage of draconian media law, crackdown on protests and banning of cartoon

The state of civic space is rated as ‘obstructed’ by the CIVICUS Monitor. Over the last few years, there have been reports of harassment and threats to journalists, arbitrary arrests and excessive force against protesters, restrictions on protest and threats against human rights defenders, both offline and online, including against women activists. The government has also failed to deal effectively with past crimes.

In November 2026, the Maldives human rights record was reviewed by the UN Human Rights Council. Among the recommendations made were for the government to protect human rights defenders against threats, smear campaigns, and attempts at criminalisation, conduct independent, transparent, and effective investigations into reported violations against civil society actors, and ensure perpetrators are held accountable. There were also recommendations to provide a conducive environment for the freedom of the press, including measures against harassment of journalists and against political interference in the media landscape and to revise the media and broadcasting regulation law.

In the same month, the UN Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination raised concerns that there were no plans to amend the provision in the act setting up the Human Rights Commission, which required members of the Commission to be Muslims, which was a clear violation of the Convention and the Constitution of Maldives.

In recent months, a draconian media regulation bill was passed and the government has used it to order the takedown of a political cartoon. Protests against the media law were met with excessive force by the police. There was also a mass protest by the opposition that was disrupted with arrests and ill-treatment, and a protest by a fisherfolk union that was also disrupted. A court overturned convictions of the murder of a human rights defender, while civil society has been affected by funding cuts.

Expression

Draconian media regulation bill passed that could be used to silence expression

Parliament passed the Maldives Media and Broadcasting Regulation Bill on 16th September 2025, and President Muizzu ratified it just two days later, on 18th September.

In August 2025, government‑aligned MP Hannan reintroduced the Maldives Media and Broadcasting Regulation Bill, seeking to dissolve existing media regulatory bodies and establish a single, centralised commission with expanded oversight and sanctioning powers. The bill’s revival appeared in a context where the ruling party held a supermajority, enabling rapid passage with minimal opposition scrutiny.

Under the legislation, the Maldives Media Council and Maldives Broadcasting Commission would be replaced with a standalone media commission. This new body would comprise seven members, three of whom would be appointed by the president to oversee media operations. The parliament would have the power to remove commission members elected by media outlets at any time with a no-confidence vote, fuelling fears about the commission’s independence.

The commission would be empowered to order media outlets to issue correction notices on online content and impose fines from 5,000 Maldivian rufiyaa to 25,000 Maldivian rufiyaa (USD 325 to 1,623) on journalists and media workers who fail to comply with their orders. The commission could suspend media outlets at will, block newspaper websites and halt broadcasts while complaints are investigated.

These powers have been widely criticised as overbroad and incompatible with international safeguards on freedom of expression. UN experts also warned it would seriously undermine media freedom and contravene the Maldives’ obligations under ICCPR, to which it is a state party.

UN Human Rights Office spokesperson Ravina Shamdasani said: “The Maldives Media and Broadcasting Regulation Law grants the new Media and Broadcasting Commission intrusive powers to conduct investigations, impose fines on media workers, and revoke and cancel licenses and permits of media outlets.”

Government orders takedown of political cartoon

On 23rd January 2025, the Maldives Media and Broadcasting Commission issued the first known takedown order under the new Maldives Media and Broadcasting law, requiring Adhadhu to remove a political cartoon which satirised the prevalence of theft and bribery in Maldivian society and included a likeness of Maldivian president, Mohamed Muizzu. It was to be removed from all social media platforms, with the outlet’s regular Siyaasee cartoon segment also suspended indefinitely.

The government claimed the cartoon contravened the ‘basic tenets of Islam’, but failed to provide legal justification or an explanation of how the image had violated religious principles.

On 25th January 2025, a second order followed, directing media outlets not to circulate the cartoon while the investigation is ongoing. The regulator also warned Dhauru to remove the same cartoon from a news article reporting on the takedown, illustrating that enforcement extended beyond original creators to those merely reporting on censorship.

Adhadhu petitioned the Civil Court, arguing that the Commission has no power to issue interim takedown orders; the orders violate Article 27 (freedom of expression); and the Commission’s actions lacked legal justification.

The Maldives Journalists Association (MJA) condemned the enforcement as an act of media control and filed its own constitutional challenge seeking annulment of the law’s vague and overbroad provisions.

Peaceful Assembly

Ill-treatment at protest against the Media and Broadcasting Regulation Bill

From early September 2025, journalists, media workers, and opposition MPs raised alarm at the speed, opacity, and lack of consultation surrounding the Media and Broadcasting Regulation Bill.

On 16th September 2025, as the bill was being pushed through an extraordinary sitting held outside the parliamentary schedule in its Seventh Special Session, journalists and media workers protested outside parliament, where police officers were reported to have pushed and manhandled media workers. Leevan Ali Naseer, Adhadhu journalist and member of the Maldives Media Council, was allegedly ill-treated and taken into custody, as was taxi driver Mohamed Shamin. Both were later released.

This police treatment later prompted the National Integrity Commission to open an investigation into allegations of the use of excessive force.

Opposition rally disrupted by police with excessive force

On 3rd October 2025, the opposition MDP held one of the largest rallies of the year, with around 2500 demonstrators, called “Lootuvaifi” (Stop the Looting). Protesters criticised corruption, the new media law, shrinking civic freedoms, and local governance restrictions. Further, protestors were frustrated by the leaking of the Adeeb files, constitutional amendments, and a crackdown on media freedom.

Police established widespread barricades, blocked key march routes, and deployed riot squads. As the crowd attempted to move beyond the approved route, officers used large quantities of pepper spray against both protesters and journalists, leading to moments of panic and distress. Opposition MDP member Mohamed Raslaan allegedly suffered a heart attack after being exposed to pepper spray at close range and subjected to a Long Range Acoustic Device (LRAD). Eight people were arrested. Reportedly, rally detainees were denied access to their legal counsel.

During the protest, police deployed a Long‑Range Acoustic Device (LRAD) - the first recorded use of this military‑grade sonic weapon in a protest context in the Maldives, although the Homeland Security Minister later claimed that LRADs had been in the police arsenal since 2013 and were used in 2023. Rights groups condemned it as excessive, dangerous, and incompatible with international human rights standards. The Human Rights Commission of Maldives (HRCM) opened a formal investigation into the LRAD use after concerns were raised by residents, journalists, and medical professionals. MDP also launched a petition against the use of LRADs.

The next day, on 4th October 2025, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs issued a statement defending the police response, arguing that protesters had deviated from approved routes.

Arrests during protest by fisherfolk union

On 10th and 11th December 2025, the Bodu Kanneli Masveringe Union (BKMU) or the yellowfin tuna fisherfolk mobilised an unprecedented maritime protest, sailing 49 vessels from Hulhumalé toward Malé. The protest followed months of grievances, including the lack of purchasing by the Maldives Industrial Fisheries Company (MIFCO), falling prices, and absence of a promised minimum price, delays in payments, high fuel costs, and insufficient access to ice and storage.

The fleet formed a line outside the harbour, but the Coast Guard and police blocked entry to Malé. Officers later boarded multiple vessels, seized at least three boats, and escorted them to Dhoonidhoo detention island. Eight protestors, including MP Mauroof Zakir - the secretary-general of BKMU - three other union members and four migrant workers from Bangladesh, were arrested for disobeying police orders and obstructing police duties. Police transferred the migrant crew members to Immigration despite the protest being organised and led by Maldivians.

Gina Romero, the UN Special Rapporteur on the rights to freedom of peaceful assembly and association, raised concerns over reports of the arrests, drawing international attention to the state of civic and labour freedoms in the country.

The opposition MDP submitted a complaint to the International Labour Organization, alleging that authorities had violated labour rights protections and unduly used force and coercion to suppress the protest. By 17th December 2025, all detainees had been released, with migrant crew transferred to Immigration for further processing.

Association

Court overturns convictions for murder of human rights defender

In December 2025, the High Court overturned the life sentences imposed on two men convicted of the murder of human rights defender and blogger Yameen Rasheed and ordered the Criminal Court to review the case. In a verdict released on 31st December 2025 the High Court of the Maldives unanimously ruled that the convictions and sentences of Ismail Haisham Rasheed and Ahmed Zihan Ismail should be reconsidered. The court referred the matter back to the Criminal Court of Maldives for review.

The High Court also ordered a review of the cases of two other defendants, Ismail Rasheed and Mohamed Dhifran, who had previously been acquitted by the Criminal Court.

The Maldives Journalist Association (MJA) expressed concerns regarding the decision to void the sentences of said individuals. MJA stated that “freeing those after a retrial had been ordered sends a negative message and undermines the value of journalists’ lives”, describing the decision as “an obstacle to justice”.

As previously documented, blogger and social media activist Yameen Rasheed was found stabbed to death on 23rd April 2017 outside his apartment building. He had received multiple death threats before his murder, which he had reported to the police. Rasheed had been a vocal critic of rising religious extremism, human rights abuses, injustice and government corruption. In January 2022, a criminal court convicted two people in connection with the murder.

Civil society affected by funding cuts

In 2025, Maldivian civil society has been significantly impacted by the US foreign aid freeze. CSOs in the country reported staff layoffs, cancelled projects, loss of long-term donors, and starting over after programme suspensions. These impacts were disproportionate for organisations working on governance and democracy, rights monitoring, and community development.