Emergency motion filed to Parliament claiming former President Waheed lied about attack

Male’ Maldives – An emergency motion has been filed to the Parliament on Monday, accusing former President Dr. Mohamed Waheed Hassan Manik of lying about the recent attack against him.

The motion was filed by MP of Un’goofaaru constituency Mohamed Waheed (Wadde). The motion detailed that the alleged attack by a Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) activist on Dr. Waheed and his wife was false and that the former president was attempting to threaten and cause harm to a private citizen.

On Sunday morning, Dr. Waheed tweeted about an attack on his wife and himself which took place earlier that day.

While his initial tweet did not detail the nature of the attack, his office released a statement a couple of hours later, which explained the incident.


Following the incident coming to light, many took to social media in support of the MDP activist while some sided with the former president. Others pointed out the hypocrisy of the government for bringing attention to an issue of an elite being verbally abused on the road, while women face on the daily, and yet it was something that had never been formally addressed to the same degree as the incident concerning Dr. Waheed.

With the emergency motion, the issue was addressed in the Parliament, where MP Waheed (Wadde) accused Dr. Waheed of par taking in a coup which saw the resignation of former President Mohamed Nasheed from presidency in 2012. MP Waheed went on to claim that Dr. Waheed was lying about what someone said and using his power and influence to file a report with the police.

Dr. Waheed served Maldives as the president from 7th February, 2012 to 12th November, 2013, which was lead to by the resignation of the then president Nasheed, under whom Dr. Waheed was the vice president.

MDP continues to claim that the resignation of Nasheed, who is now the Speaker of the Parliament of Maldives was in fact an unseating in a coup d’état, of which Dr. Waheed was a part of.

However an investigation by the Commission of National Inquity concluded otherwise, although the investigation report itself is still a subject of dispute.