The Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) has appealed to the High Court against a Family Court ruling that determined the party and its Chairperson, Fayyaz Ismail, could be held liable for damages following comments made by party activist Mariyam Zubair (Mandhy) concerning President Dr. Mohamed Muizzu's child during an MDP protest.

The Family Court's ruling, issued on November 16th of last year, has now been appealed to the High Court by MDP, Fayyaz, and Mandhy. The High Court, having received the appeal on December 16th, has not yet decided whether to accept the case.

In early March of this year, First Lady Sajidha Mohamed filed a lawsuit concerning statements made by Mandhy during an MDP protest. Mandhy had alleged that President Dr. Mohamed Muizzu's decision to ban vapes in the Maldives was due to his son, Umair Mohamed Muizzu, using vapes.

Following its review of the case, the Family Court ruled last November that the dignity and safety of the President's child had been compromised by the statements made by Mandhy and another MDP activist, Ahmed Saleem (Maaz Saleem).

The ruling further stated that instead of condemning or prohibiting the statements made by Mandhy and Saleem, the MDP had encouraged their remarks, and this was proven. Consequently, the ruling stipulated that MDP and Fayyaz, in his capacity as the party's chairperson, must bear responsibility for this.

Therefore, the ruling granted Sajidha the opportunity to seek damages from Fayyaz and MDP.

Sajidha has also filed a lawsuit against Mandhy and Fayyaz in the Civil Court regarding this matter. After reviewing the case, the Civil Court determined that Sajidha was entitled to claim damages due to Mandhy's statements.

However, the Civil Court ruled that Fayyaz and MDP were not responsible for the statements made by Mandhy.