some are specialized in only Shari’ah while others in common law. It is important to highlight that there were no requirements established by law for qualification of a legal practitioner till August 10, 2010, merely pre degree level of familiarity with Shari’ah Law was considered sufficient, resulting in limited education and practical experience among judges. This resulted in shortage of legally qualified people in civil, common and international law. 95. The Judges’ Act granted a seven‐year period for judges to enhance their qualifications and the judiciary currently provides educational programs and training opportunities for its staff to improve their competency. 96. The State should ensure that officials working in the judicial system are provided education and training they require to improve their competency and better equip them to apply the Constitution and interpret the legislations of Maldives. 97. Judicial Service Commission (JSC) of Maldives established as an independent and impartial body, mandated with properly vetting and reappointing non‐Supreme Court judges and magistrates are constantly being accused and criticized by media and non‐governmental organizations as well as persons within the judiciary for failing to work towards the independence of the judiciary, and for its lack of proper procedure and transparency. 98. The transparency of judges as well as JSC is in fact, questionable as some judges have failed to submit their income and property statements to JSC. Likewise, JSC had failed to take the appropriate actions against those judges. The Article 53 of the Maldivian Constitution, states that every judge shall annually submit to the Judicial Service Commission, a statement of all property and monies, owned business interests and all assets and liabilities. The Auditor General’s Report 2010 of JSC, shows that 17 judges have failed to submit their annual financial statements to JSC and Auditor General’s Office had given a directive in its report to JSC to take appropriate actions against those judges.42 99. The State should review any existing rules of procedure that hamper transparency in the judiciary and establish mechanisms that make way for a transparent judiciary. The State should investigate all accusations against judiciary and judicial officials that would hamper or affect the conduct of fair and impartial trials and take appropriate legal action. Chapter: Article 14: Equality before the Law & Article 26: Legal Protection of the Law Transparency 44