CIVICUS discusses Maldives’ new media bill with Naaif Ahmed, President of Maldives Journalists Association, a civil society organisation that promotes journalistic professional rights, supports local media and advocates for a safe and free working environment.

On 18 September, Maldivian President Mohamed Muizzu signed into law a Media and Broadcasting Regulation Bill that dissolves two independent media bodies and replaces them with a commission empowered to fine, suspend and block outlets. Passed without meaningful consultation, the law has drawn condemnation from journalists and rights groups as an assault on press freedom. The move further constricts civic space in a country struggling to consolidate democratic freedoms since ending authoritarian rule in 2008.

Why did the government introduce this law?

The government claims it introduced the bill to promote responsible and independent media. In reality, its actions tell a different story. The bill was rushed through parliament without meaningful consultation with journalists and media professionals. We were banned from attending committee meetings where decisions about our future were being made.

This is not the behaviour of a government that values freedom of expression. The true motivation, as we see it, is to control the public narrative and silence dissent. The government has faced growing criticism over its economic policies and foreign relations, particularly its military cooperation with India, a policy it opposed while in opposition. Rather than addressing these issues transparently, it has chosen to suppress critical reporting.

What does the new law establish?

The law creates a body, the Maldives Media and Broadcasting Commission, that has dangerously broad powers and will likely be influenced by the government. It can impose fines on media outlets of up to MVR 250,000 (approx. US$13,000), suspend and revoke licences, block websites and halt broadcasts, even during ongoing investigations and without due process.

It can also compel journalists to reveal their sources and ban the use of secretly recorded materials, which will have a chilling effect on investigative journalism and whistleblowing. Vaguely defined terms such as ‘national security’, ‘public order’ and ‘public health’ give the commission the authority to penalise media outlets arbitrarily.

Crucially, the law defines electronic media to include social media platforms and online content. This means the commission can target individuals who post on platforms such as TikTok and Twitter/X, request court orders to suspend their accounts and confiscate their devices. Given that many Maldivians rely on social media for news, this provision could be used to censor citizens as well as journalists.

What does this law reveal about the state of democracy in the Maldives?

A free press is the foundation of any democracy, and this law will undermine public debate by restricting access to independent information and ensuring only the government’s narrative is heard. I fear this will pave the way for internet censorship and politically motivated targeting of critical media outlets.

The implications for electoral integrity are grave. Without a free press to scrutinise candidates and expose wrongdoing, elections risk becoming a mere formality, processes that legitimise power rather than challenge it.

This law is part of a wider pattern of democratic backsliding. Independent institutions are being politicised, checks and balances are being eroded and tolerance for dissent is shrinking. Recently, security forces have begun targeting opposition activists who criticise the government on social media and confiscating their phones. The media law is only the latest and most blatant attempt to consolidate control.

How have journalists and civil society responded?

The response has been unified and determined. The Maldives Journalists Association, alongside other media outlets and civil society organisations, has launched an extensive advocacy campaign. We have held peaceful protests, petitioned parliament and the president and demanded withdrawal of the bill. We have also issued joint statements with international organisations and used every available platform to make our opposition known.

Journalists have faced arrest, harassment and intimidation for simply doing their jobs. One member of parliament went so far as to call for journalists to be ‘impaled’. Despite these threats, we remain defiant. As an act of civil disobedience, the association is establishing an independent self-regulation body, the Maldives Free Press Council, which will operate free from government interference.

What can the international community do to support press freedom in the Maldives?

We welcome the strong condemnation from international partners, including the United Nations, UK and USA. Continued international pressure is vital to hold the government accountable and ensure democratic norms are upheld.

We urge the international community to use all available diplomatic and advocacy channels to press for the repeal of this repressive law. The future of democracy in the Maldives depends on the protection of a free and independent press.