Abdul Raheem Abdulla, Speaker of the Parliament, has declared that he holds his position with complete independence and is free from any external influence.

The Speaker made these remarks in response to comments from opposition-affiliated Galolhu Dhekunu constituency member Meekail Ahmed Naseem, who had expressed concerns about the Speaker's circumstances.

During parliamentary proceedings, Meekail indicated that he sympathised with the Speaker and his condition, suggesting that the Parliament Speaker had been held at "gunpoint" through the People's Parliament.

Promptly responding to Meekail, the Speaker asserted that since the member had no factual knowledge about his personal matters, there was no opportunity to discuss such issues. He emphasised that he occupies his parliamentary seat with complete freedom and faces no obstacles in conducting the Parliament's work.

The Speaker stated that the honourable member would not know about his health condition, living situation, or any other personal circumstance, and therefore, there was not an opportunity to comment on that. He added that he was sitting with complete freedom in the seat to which he was elected by the honourable members of Parliament, and that there were no obstacles whatsoever for him in the Parliament.

The Speaker urged Meekail to refrain from making statements that might mislead the public.

In addition to addressing personal concerns, the Speaker responded to Meekail's comments regarding a bill proposed by Holhudhoo constituency member Abdul Sattar Mohamed to reduce the Supreme Court judges' bench. According to Meekail's claims, the Government is working to exert undue influence on the court and undermine the country's constitution, allegedly using Parliament as a "weapon" to accomplish this.

Rejecting this characterisation, the Speaker pointed out that since Parliament possesses the authority to amend the constitution and laws, suggesting that introducing bills constitutes using Parliament as a "weapon" was fundamentally unacceptable.

The Speaker concluded that the Parliament exists precisely for amending the constitution and laws, enacting laws, and reforming laws. Therefore, he maintained that characterising the submission of a bill to Parliament as using Parliament as a “weapon” is simply not an acceptable assertion.