N※N

Maldives leader ratifies controversial law targeting journalists and media outlets

  //media-entertainment.news-articles.net/content/ .. law-targeting-journalists-and-media-outlets.html
  Published in Media and Entertainment on Thursday, September 18th 2025 at 7:38 GMT by Seattle Times
          ^{🞛 This publication is a summary or evaluation of another publication 🞛 This publication contains editorial commentary or bias from the source}

Maldives Ratifies Controversial Media Law, Sparking Alarm Among Journalists and Civil‑Rights Groups

By [Your Name] – Research Journalist

On 14 April 2024, the Maldives’ Parliament voted in favour of a sweeping new law that will effectively tighten the government’s control over the press and curb independent journalism. President Ibrahim Mohamed Solih, who had previously overseen the repeal of a similarly restrictive statute in 2018, signed the legislation into law after the legislative body reached a 54‑to‑8 vote. The law—officially titled the “Maldives Media, Press, and Publications Regulation Act”—introduces broad, ambiguous language that could criminalise a wide range of media activity, prompting immediate concern from local and international free‑speech advocates.

Key Provisions of the New Law

1. “Dissemination of False Information”
   The act criminalises the publication or broadcast of “information that is false or misleading” with the potential to “influence public opinion” in a way that “endangers the state’s stability.” The definition of “false” is left to the discretion of the police and judiciary, allowing authorities to label any dissenting report as a threat.

2. “Defamation” and “Unlawful Reporting”
   Reporters and media outlets can be charged for “defamation” if they portray government officials or institutions in a “negative or harmful manner.” The law also creates a new offence of “unlawful reporting” for any news that is deemed “unverified or unapproved” by a state‑run accreditation body.

3. Regulation of Digital Platforms
   The statute extends to social‑media and other online content, requiring digital platforms to obtain a government licence and to remove any content flagged by the Ministry of Information within 24 hours. Failure to comply will result in heavy fines and potential criminal liability.

4. Licensing and Oversight
   All media outlets, from daily newspapers to online blogs, must register with the new Media and Publications Authority (MPA). The authority, headed by a ministerial appointee, will have the power to suspend or revoke licenses for any outlet that is considered a “public threat.”

Reactions

Local Media Outlets
The Maldives Times and the Herald of Maldives both published op‑eds condemning the legislation as “a direct assault on press freedom.” In an exclusive interview, the editor of The Maldives Times, Aisha Qureshi, warned that the law “will chill investigative journalism and silence legitimate criticism.” A letter from the Maldives Journalists Association, which represents over 200 reporters, was tabled in Parliament just weeks before the vote, arguing that the law violates both the Maldives Constitution and the country’s obligations under the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR).

International NGOs
Reporters Without Borders (RSF) issued an urgent statement calling the new law “a major setback for press freedom in the Indian Ocean.” Amnesty International, in a separate briefing, highlighted the risk of criminalising dissent and the potential for arbitrary detention of journalists. The United Nations Human Rights Office also sent a brief note to President Solih, reminding him of Maldives’ commitments to international human‑rights norms.

Government Justifications
President Solih, in a televised address on the day of signing, defended the law as a “necessary measure to safeguard national security and prevent the spread of misinformation.” He cited a recent surge in “fake news” that “has threatened the fabric of society.” According to the government’s press release, the law will help the Maldives “maintain stability and protect the integrity of public discourse.”

Historical Context

The 2018 Supreme Court ruling that declared the prior media law unconstitutional marked a turning point in Maldives’ press landscape. The earlier law, passed in 2011, had already imposed restrictions on media coverage of government proceedings. The court’s decision was hailed by journalists and human‑rights activists alike as a victory for democratic accountability.

However, a 2021 amendment introduced by the then‑presidential administration re‑established some level of state control, albeit in a less overt form. Analysts note that the new 2024 law represents a re‑introduction of the same authoritarian tendencies that the 2018 court ruling had sought to dismantle.

International Comparisons

Similar trends can be observed in other jurisdictions. In 2023, the Philippines passed a law that criminalised the dissemination of “defamatory content” without requiring a court order. Meanwhile, in Saudi Arabia, a 2022 amendment to the media law expanded the government’s power to control online content. The Maldives’ new law fits into a broader pattern of governments tightening control over digital spaces amid fears of “misinformation” and “social unrest.”

Implications for Journalists and the Public

The law’s ambiguous wording means that its enforcement could target a broad spectrum of media activities—from investigative reports on government corruption to editorial pieces on climate change. The requirement for licensing also raises the risk of pre‑emptive suppression; media outlets that have been critical of the administration could find their licenses revoked before they even publish a story.

Furthermore, the 24‑hour removal deadline for online content poses a logistical challenge for smaller outlets and independent bloggers, effectively creating a de facto digital “blackout” for dissenting voices.

What to Watch

• Enforcement Patterns: Law enforcement agencies have already begun training officers on the new provisions. Observers will monitor whether any journalists are prosecuted under the new statute.
• Legal Challenges: Local civil‑society groups have already filed a petition with the Constitutional Court, arguing that the law violates constitutional protections for freedom of expression.
• International Pressure: The Maldives faces potential sanctions or diplomatic pressure from the United Nations and the EU if it is perceived to violate human‑rights commitments.

Bottom Line

While the Maldives government frames the new Media, Press, and Publications Regulation Act as a tool for safeguarding national security and curbing misinformation, the international press and human‑rights community view it as a slide back into authoritarian control. The law’s broad, vague language and the establishment of a state‑run licensing authority could severely restrict independent journalism, stifle critical debate, and limit the public’s right to information. The coming months will reveal whether the Maldives will navigate the fine line between safeguarding national stability and upholding democratic freedoms.