The UN expressed criticism on Monday of the Maldives Parliament’s dismissal of two judges from the country’s Supreme Court. The UN Human Rights Office claimed that the government’s recent anti-corruption investigations targeted at Supreme Court judges threaten the independence of the judiciary.

The UN cited the timing of the investigations that led to the dismissal of judges Azmiralda and Mahaz, which commenced soon after a constitutional challenge was launched against the government, as evidence that the investigations were intended to prevent the Supreme Court from striking down a recent constitutional amendment that forces members of parliament to vote along party lines and restricts members from switching political parties.

The justices who were subject to investigation allege that they were now allowed to testify to defend themselves, and that Justice Azmiralda’s lawyer was not permitted to speak in her defense in the closed-door trials that led to the dismissals. If these allegations are true, this is a serious breach of due process, which ensures that the law is applied fairly.

This could set a troubling precedent that normalizes government intervention in the court system, which risks undermining the rule of law by making the court system ineffective at enforcing the law against the government.

The investigations were commenced after the government passed a law that reduced the number of Supreme Court justices from seven to five under the pretense of criminal investigations into judges Azmiralda, Mahaz, and Suood conducted by the Maldives Anti-Corruption Commission based on anonymous complaints.

The judges were accused of using their influence to secure the release of Justice Azmiralda’s husband after he was arrested, even though the first public evidence of direct communications between the judges and the criminal court responsible for Justice Azmiralda’s husband’s case was following his release.

In March, Justice Al Suood resigned in protest of the investigation.

The UN called for the Maldives to comply with international human rights obligations, which require an independent and effective judiciary to effectively protect human rights and equality before the law.