Court denies Nasheed's request to issue interim order to halt uprooting trees on Ameenee Magu

The Civil Court has ruled that the court will not be issuing an interim order to stop felling trees on Ameenee Magu during the ongoing road development project assigned to Road Development Corporation (RDC).

The court’s ruling came in response to the Speaker of Parliament and former president Mohamed Nasheed’s appeal to stop cutting down trees from Ameenee Magu as part of “redevelopment” and relocating the trees to Kudagiri, a picnic island being developed by the state.

Shunana and Co, the law firm representing the case on behalf of Nasheed, stated that hearing the case without an interim order in place, will allow for Nasheed’s request to go without a proper solution. They said that without the interim order, by the time the verdict is delivered, irreversible damage to the country and its environment will have been done.

In determining whether an interim injunction must be granted, courts must apply the test of the balance of convenience in that whether the balance of convenience lays in favor of granting the interim order and the three-part test laid down by the Supreme Court; the likelihood of success on the merits or a presumption of a sound legal basis, a risk of imminent and irreparable damage and the legal capacity to apply for an injunction.

Nasheed’s lawyers noted that removing the trees while RDC is capable of completing the project without removing them goes against Article 22 and Article 23(c) of the constituency which proves that the appeal had legal basis and the appellant had the legal capacity.

Additionally, Nasheed’s Lawyers argued that in addition to the climatic and environmental damage, the consequences of the act of tree felling causes on people’s healths could become catastrophic and thus poses a “risk of imminent and irreparable damage”, to be granted an interim injunction by court.

Shunana and Co. argued that since the tree felling posed a threat to the community, as part of said community, president Nasheed most definitely has the capacity to appeal and request for an interim order.

Nasheed had previously said that he was prepared to settle the issue in court saying that the action needed to be reconsidered and weighed. He had practically urged the contracting company and planning ministry to weigh the alternatives rather than simply logging the trees and had threatened to sue as a public citizen.

Upon receiving backlash from the public regarding the tree felling issue, RDC issued a statement saying that the trees will be removed from the ground without causing damage and replanted at Kudagiri. Moreover, they will be planting trees on Ameenee Magu, after redevelopment, should there be space for that.

Nasheed had built his case against RDC and the Planning Ministry.

The defense lawyers stated that according to the document submitted by Nasheed as evidence, the EIA report for the Ameenee Magu project, there was nothing that contradicts the law and there are no endangered or protected trees on Ameenee Magu. Although the trees were being removed as there was no other alternative, the removed trees will be relocated to schools and parks in Male’City.

The Planning Ministry said that removing trees from the street is not irreversible and it was stated as such in the report as well. Moreover, they said that the process of removing and replanting the trees are detailed in the report and the state has given permission to remove all the trees that need to be removed for the progress of the project.

Furthermore, the ministry said that the appeal included no indication or proof that the state had missed any procedural necessities. Therefore, they believe that the appeal lacked foundation.

The ministry said that the EIA report submitted by the appellant is proof that the project was by law and according to and article by Mohamed Zahir (Meem Zaviyani), experts believe that the benefits to removing the necessary trees from Ameenee Nagu for the duration of the development project exceeds the cons.

RDC argued that halting the project under an interim order will delay their timeline causing the company to lose MVR 100,000 every day and looking at the City Council’s concept, there was no way to work around the trees on AMeenee Magu.

The Civil Court ruling highlighted that despite wanting to let the trees be, RDC had estimated that many of the trees will need to be removed and they had already detailed the process to remove and relocate the trees as needed. Furthermore, the court noted that the EIA report concluded that all aspects of the project were by law.

Finally, the court ruling stated that when considering the environmental aspects, the EIA report states that the damage to the environment was not irreversible and granting the interim order will leave the road unusable while causing great financial distress to the contractor. The court said that while the EPA has not said anything regarding the tree felling, EIA has given permitted tree felling on Ameenee Magu repeatedly.

Taking everything into consideration, Judge Mariyam Waheed decided to deny the request for interim injunction to President Nasheed.