Category:

Richard Branson calls for early elections “as soon as feasibly possible”

Founder of the Virgin empire, multi-billionaire Sir Richard Branson, has again delved into Maldivian politics with a third blog post on the subject, declaring his support for early elections “as soon as feasibly possible”.

Branson first wrote an open letter calling on “interim” President Dr Mohamed Waheed Hassan to “do the right thing” and hold free and fair elections before the end of the year, describing it as “completely astounding that you have been part of an overthrow of a democratically elected government that has effectively let the old regime back into power.”

Several days later he had a phone call with Dr Waheed, and subsequently said he believed the new president was “determined to be an honest broker” who “had nothing to do with [the coup]. He watched the situation unfolding on television.”

Branson’s third and most recent post came after “a lengthy conversation with former President Mohamed Nasheed”, who “wanted to be sure that it was completely clear what had happened in the Maldives.”

“Mr Nasheed said that he had been overthrown by a coup. He said that the confusion about what happened in the first two days came about because he was forced to remain in the Presidential Palace in order to keep him away from the press, was therefore incommunicado, and only managed to escape after a couple of days,” Branson wrote.

“He said that he was very concerned the Maldives could become another Afghanistan. He believes that the way to resolve this is for interim President Waheed to step down and for The Speaker to hold court for two months.
He said he sees no reason why there shouldn’t be early elections during this calendar year, preferably within two-to-three months. The people of this country, he said, need to be asked as soon as possible who they want to rule them. The Maldives and the Maldivians urgently need to get back on track.

“He believed that there was is Islamic element of the military and mentioned that some of them chanted on the street “God is great”. He said that the new government had thrown out all human rights cases and corruption cases, which he felt was wrong. He said that some of his MPs had been removed, others had court cases brought against them.

“He ended by saying: ‘Governments should only be changed through the ballot box and not by any other means. No military in the world should be allowed to take over a Government and hold on to it.’

“We now have both sides of the story,” Branson declared.

“Having listened to both sides, it does seem wise for an election to take place as soon as is feasibly possible so that the people of the Maldives can begin to put this ugly chapter behind them.”

Branson attended the Slow Life Symposium at the upmarket Soneva Fushi resort in October 2011, a highly eco-conscious resort owned by Sonu and Eva Shivdesani.

Other attendees at the resort included actress Daryl Hannah, star of films including ‘Blade Runner’, ‘Kill Bill’ and ‘Splash’; Ed Norton, star of films including ‘Fight Club’ and ‘American History X’; Tim Smit, founder of the Eden Project; Maldives President Mohamed Nasheed; and an array of climate experts and scientists including Mark Lynas and Mike Mason.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

South Asia’s democratic advances shifting into reverse: Daily Star

From the armed coup that recently ousted the Maldives’ first democratically elected president Mohamed Nasheed, to the Pakistani Supreme Court’s current effort to undermine a toothless but elected government by indicting Prime Minister Yousaf Raza Gilani on contempt charges, South Asia’s democratic advances appear to be shifting into reverse, writes Brahma Chellaney in Lebanon’s Daily Star newspaper.

Nasheed’s forced resignation at gunpoint has made the Maldives the third country in the region, after Nepal and Sri Lanka, where a democratic transition has been derailed. The Maldives, a group of strategically located islands in the Indian Ocean, now seems set for prolonged instability.

Political developments in the region underscore the insufficiency of free, fair and competitive elections for ensuring a democratic transition. Elections, by themselves, do not guarantee genuine democratic empowerment at the grassroots level or adherence to constitutional rules by those in power.

As a result of sputtering transitions elsewhere in South Asia, India is now the sole country in the region with a deeply rooted pluralistic democracy. That is not in India’s interest, for it confronts the country with what might be called the “tyranny of geography” – that is, serious external threats from virtually all directions.

Today, political chaos and uncertainty in the region heighten the danger of spillover effects for India, threatening the country’s internal security. An increasingly unstable neighborhood also makes it more difficult to promote regional cooperation and integration, including free trade.

The rise of Islamist groups that has accompanied anti-democratic developments in South Asia represents a further threat to the region. In vandalism reminiscent of the Taliban’s demolition of the monumental Buddhas of Bamiyan in Afghanistan in 2001, Islamists ransacked the Maldives’ main museum in Male, the capital, on the day Nasheed was ousted, smashing priceless Buddhist and Hindu statues made of coral and limestone, virtually erasing all evidence of the Maldives’ Buddhist past before its people converted to Islam in the 12th century. “The whole pre-Islamic history is gone,” the museum’s director lamented.

Encouraged by opposition politicians, Islamist groups in the Maldives are “becoming more powerful,” according to Nasheed. Likewise, in Pakistan and Bangladesh, the military intelligence agencies have nurtured jihadist groups, employing them for political purposes at home and across national frontiers.

This follows a well-established pattern in the region: autocratic rule has tended to promote extremist elements, especially when those in power form opportunistic alliances with such forces. For example, Pakistan’s thriving jihadist factions arose under two military dictators: Muhammad Zia-ul-Haq, who used them to confront the Soviet Union in Afghanistan, and Pervez Musharraf, who fled to London in 2008 under threat of impeachment and was subsequently charged with involvement in the assassination of former Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto in 2007 – a milestone in Pakistan’s slide into chaos.

When a democratic experiment gains traction, as in Bangladesh under Sheikh Hasina, it crimps the extremists’ room for maneuver. But a broader lesson in much of the region is that democratic progress remains reversible unless the old, entrenched forces are ousted and the rule of law is firmly established.

For example, the Maldives’ 2008 democratic election, which swept away decades-old authoritarian rule, became a beacon of hope, which then dissipated in less than four years. As the freshly deposed Nasheed put it, “Dictatorships don’t always die when the dictator leaves office … [L]ong after the revolutions, powerful networks of regime loyalists can remain behind and can attempt to strangle their nascent democracies.”

As its tyranny of geography puts greater pressure on its external and internal security, India will need to develop more innovative approaches to diplomacy and national defense. Only through more vigorous defense and foreign policies can India hope to ameliorate its regional-security situation, freeing it to play a larger global role. Otherwise, it will continue to be weighed down by its region.

Read more

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Has India lost the mango and the sack in the Maldives?: South Asia Monitor

Democracy is rough road littered with potholes. Either you avoid them and play safe, or you fill them up for a smoother ride in the future. Mohamed Nasheed did both, writes Sumon Chakrabarti for the South Asia Monitor.

“First, he played safe and then he changed gears to take the problem head-on. But in doing so, he failed to avoid a collision that led to the toppling in a coup of the first-ever democratic government in the Maldives that he headed.

Clearly, Nasheed’s order to arrest Abdulla Mohamed, Chief Judge of Criminal Court, on January 16 was a political blunder. It brought a rainbow coalition of opposition politicians, mega-rich resort owners and radical Islamists out on the streets – united only by their opposition to a nascent, liberal democracy and the reforms it had brought about that are under genuine threat today.

Chief Judge Mohamed, appointed for life by former dictator Maumoon Abdul Gayoom, was facing investigation by the Judicial Services Commission for political bias and persistent refusal to prosecute cases of corruption and human rights abuses against his mentor and members of his former regime.

Hassan Saeed, Gayoom’s attorney general and now special advisor to new President Dr Mohammed Waheed, had accused him of making derogatory comments against women and even requesting an underage victim of sexual assault to re-enact her abuse in an open court.

Strange bedfellows are not unknown in politics. Judge Abdulla’s arrest galvanised the opposition led by Gayoom’s brother Yameen (who faces charges in a $800 million oil scam, the biggest corruption case in the island nation), the country’s richest businessman Gasim Ibrahim, and radical islamists led by Sheikh Imran of the religious Adhaalath Party.

Emerging details of the lead-up to the coup now point to a political deal struck on the night of January 31 between the former Vice President – and now President – and these forces. On that night, in a press confererence, they had pledged support to Waheed and asked the army and police not to take any orders from Nasheed.

But the big question is: Why did these strange bedfellows come together? The answer, many believe, lies in Malaysia, where former dictator Gayoom – who was defeated by Nasheed in the country’s first democratic elections in 2008 – has conveniently been based since the coup was in the throes of being executed.

That Gayoom, who ruled the country with an iron-first for 30 years, is the uniting force behind the coup-plotters was evident in the initial appointments that Waheed made on taking over the presidency within hours of Nasheed’s forced resignation.

The first two were loyalists of the Gayoom regime – former Justice Minister Mohamed Jameel Ahmed, who was named Home Minister, and Mohamed Nazim, a former military officer under Gayoom, who is the new Minister of Defence and National Security.

Within days, he also appointed Gayoom’s spokesperson, Mohamed Hussain Shareef (Mundhu), as his Minister for Human Resources, Youth and Sports. Gayoom’s lawyer, Azima Shakoor, was named his Attorney General, while the former dictator’s daughter, Dhunya Maumoon, was appointed State Minister for Foreign Affairs.

There was more. Ahmed Mohamed ‘Andey’, CEO of the State Trading Organisation during the Gayoom administration, was named the Minister of Economic Development, while Ahmed Shamheed – a Director at Villa Shipping and Trade, owned by one of the coup plotters Gasim Ibrahim, and the Ministry of Planning and Development in the Gayoom administration – became the Minister of Transport and Communication.

Analysts are asking whether India misread the ongoing political struggle for the second time in four years. On the eve of elections in 2008, the then Indian High Commissioner reported that Nasheed was hardly a force. He recommended continued support to Gayoom. Nasheed won.

Many say that, this time too, reports from the Indian High Commission shaped initial decisions – New Delhi recognised the new regime on February 8, within 24 hours. This was considered a show of undue haste, something the government indirectly hinted at later. Questions are also being asked about what Gayoom’s half-brother Abdullah Yameen, a long-time critic of India, was doing inside the Indian High Commission for over an hour on the morning of the coup, even as Nasheed was being forced by security forces to resign at the headquarters of the Maldives National Defence Force.

Interestingly, an Indian naval ship, INS Suvarna, was in Maldives from February 3. Strangely, the ship was allowed to leave on the morning of February 7, just four or five hours after information of the serious standoff and the plotting of the coup was received. Just the presence of the ship and some marines in the city could have stopped events from unfolding the way they did.

Foreign Secretary Ranjan Mathai soon arrived to Maldives to salvage the situation and called for early elections. The deal was that the new president, Waheed, would announce elections within 24 hours. Nothing happened.

On February 28, Mathai again flew down to the Maldives. This time he proposed to all political parties in Maldives that the amendments to the constitution should be made within one month to pave the way for an early presidential election before December this year. But during the two-hour meeting, he was repeatedly reminded by many from the new government, including Yameen’s party, that the involvement of an outsider in what was an internal matter was not warranted. Even Gayoom’s daughther Dhunya and President Waheed’s spokesperson made some uncharitable comments.

This, after India had handed over $20 million on the evening of February 27 to Mohamed Ahmed, Controller of Finance of the Finance Ministry. Apparently, an additional $50 million is on its way so that Maldives can avoid a sovereign default. All this was happening even as the new government, including the President himself, has backed out from its promise to the Foreign Secretary on holding early elections. The President, Home Minister and State Minister for Foreign Affairs have openly said in the past two days that there is no question of early elections, and that no foreign interference would be tolerated in the matter.

But with lost credibility and a history of dumping friends – from Burma to Bangladesh and now Maldives, the reality is stark – India has, as the saying goes, lost the mango as well as the sack in the Maldives. It has lost the goodwill of every democracy-loving Maldivian and has not gained anything from the new dispensation – backed and aided by a cocktail of the military, police, mafia and radicals.

Read more

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

“Dark day in constitutional and parliamentary history”: Dr Jameel

The government has responded to the Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) MPs’ preventing President Mohamed Waheed Hassan from giving the annual presidential address on March 1, in a press conference on Thursday.

Special Advisor to the President Dr Hassan Saeed, Home Minister Dr Mohamed Jameel and Attorney General Azima Shukoor, criticised the acts of the MPs, labeling them “uncivilised” and “unethical”.

“President Waheed went to the Majlis at 10:00am and had waited until 6:30pm to execute his constitutional duty,” said Dr Saeed. “He faced enormous challenges and obstruction [from MDP MPs] during this time but tried his best to resolve the situation peacefully until the last minute.”

Dr Saeed said that although he could not deliver his speech in the parliament, he had shared a written copy of his speech with the speaker and members of parliament would have received a copy of it by now.

“After requests from MDP MPs, the President met with them and they did make some proposals. The President, as the head of the state, even acknowledged those proposals but it all went astray at the end of the day,” Dr Saeed said.

“One proposal the MPs made was that instead of political parties negotiating on early elections, they wanted parliament to decide on the matter,” he added.

“The events that happened [in the Majlis] were uncivilised and unethical given the developed era we live in today.”

Home Minister Dr Jameel described Thursday as a “dark day in constitutional and parliamentary history” of the Maldives and acknowledged the patience and determination of the security forces in handling the situation.

“Security forces [police and MNDF] handled the situation with great patience and determination. Many officers sustained various degrees of injuries while controlling the protesters,” Dr Jameel said.

“14 officers sustained injuries, four of which were serious. One officer is still in a critical condition and is being prepared to be flown to Sri Lanka for additional care,” he continued.

He emphasised that the government would take action within the boundaries of the law against everybody who had obstructed the duties of the police, including those currently in police custody.

Dr Jameel noted that after investigation of those arrested, police had found that some of the suspects had tested positive for drugs after urine tests.

“We are now getting evidence that there are unlawful activities going on in the demonstrations held by the MDP,” he claimed.

Attorney General Azima Shukoor stated that she did not believe Dr Waheed had failed in executing his constitutional duties since as per the article 84 of the constitution, the first session of the parliament had not convened.

“According to the article 84 of the constitution, as long as the first session of the parliament has not convened, I do not believe that the president has failed in executing his constitutional duty,” she said.

Article 84 states: “At the beginning of the first session of each year at the first sitting, the President shall address the People’s Majlis [Parliament] on the state of the country, and may present proposals for improving the state of the country to the People’s Majlis.”

Shukoor offered assurances that President Waheed would remain determined to execute his constitutional duties and that he remained willing go to parliament and deliver the presidential address if the speaker and the parliament invited him to do so.

Asked how the government could proceed in passing bills and approving the appointment of ministers, if MDP MPs continued to challenge the government’s legitimacy and obstruct government proposals, Dr Saeed responded that “No one should try to take advantage of the President’s approach of negotiating for a peaceful solution, and no one will succeed. The President will do whatever he can in his capacity to deliver peace and order in the country.

“Those who obstructed the President from delivering the speech were not the majority of the parliament. There were 44 other MPs whose rights were deprived by them,” continued Dr Saeed.

“Whether [the MDP] believe it or not, this government is legitimate. It came to power constitutionally.

“Even if there are questions of legitimacy, this is not the way things have to be done. The international community, including the Commonwealth, have recognised the Commission that the government formed to investigate questions regarding that arose regarding recent events,” continued Saeed.

Dr Jameel said: “The actual answer to the question [you] asked is, we are seeing the behavioral differences between two political groups of the country. That is, since the beginning if anything that goes the way the MDP does not want, they always blame the institutions and the heads of those institutions.

“For instance, look at the example when the court issues a verdict in the case of MP Ismail Abdul Hameed or MP Musthafa, [two MPs who lost the seats recently]. [They claimed] the courts were at fault and they did not recognise the courts. MP Reeko Moosa Manik created his own court and issued verdicts. Where in the world does that happen? I am surprised because journalists don’t notice that,” Jameel said.

Jameel went on to state that “They [former government] arrested people the way they want and did not get their custodial period extended, for example the way they arrested me, I think they made a world record by summoning a politician six times in one week to the police station and keeping me very brutally in isolation at Dhoonidhoo island on three occasions just because of an opinion I expressed.”

Jameel continued “Minivan news is a newpaper which advocates freedom of expression as I heard, but even in Minivan News I highlight with regret that I don’t think they had reported this case, also I heard there was a group who advocated for detainees rights but they chose to remain silent when we were arrested, also they went to the court and said that we got orders from above to arrest Jameel. This is what the court said. Because it failed the courts were at fault [for MDP]”

Jameel also said that the Anti Corruption Commission (ACC), Civil Service Commission (CSC) and Attorney General’s office had all been portrayed as at fault because they had issued statements that were against what MDP had wanted.

The police and the Maldives National Defence force had been painted as at fault by the MDP, Dr Jameel claimed, “because they had only asked then government not to issue unlawful orders. So [the MDP portrayed] them as the worst people that ever created. These are examples that can be seen.”

Jameel reiterated that when DRP was in opposition they had “never had hijacked the parliament when the President arrived to deliver the speech.”

Minivan News asked whether the government would continue to seek to negotiate a political solution for the situation, to which Dr Saeed responded: “This government is not a government that will declare war against parliament. If a bill or a policy that the government proposes is rejected by the parliament, we will not arrest MPs for charges of acting against the state. We will not keep MPs on Aarah for 10 days.”

“I assure that even if the most important policy of President Waheed does not pass, he will not take any action against the parliament. Cabinet Ministers won’t resign. He won’t protest in front of the parliament building. We assure you that from President Waheed.”

Dr Saeed also said that the policies Dr Waheed would propose would not be his own policies, or those of the coalition he represents, but would rather be in the best interest of the people. He also stated that Waheed’s policies would “not contradict the oath of the MPs as well.”

Shukoor responding, stating that “In the question of legitimacy, the opposition during Nasheed’s presidency questioned his legitimacy as well. But during that term, the legitimacy was not a problem because the constitution states that for any reason if the president resigns, the vice president would take his place. That’s what is in the constitution.”

“We are speaking of an early election not because we have a legal issue here, nor there is a question of legitimacy of the current government, but to find a political solution. We are calling to amend the constitution for an early election because there are no stipulations that allow an early election to be called.”

“It is very clear. The vice president can remain till the end of the term [after assuming presidency]. It is stated in the constitution so there are no issues of legitimacy here,” she claimed.

“The current president who is in power is the person people voted for in case the serving president was unable to continue his term in any circumstance, so even looking at the political purpose here, there is no question of legitimacy here.”

“When you say a sizable amount of MPs are questioning the president’s legitimacy, I believe the national flag was torn off [in the parliament chamber] not because there was a question of legitimacy of the president, thiswas is very clear. That the speaker was unable to get into the parliament chamber was not an issue concerning the legitimacy of the president.”

Shukoor said that even if the legitimacy question was there, no one should dishonor the national flag as the national flag was legitimate.

During the scuffles in parliament, Minivan News observed from the press gallery that the national flag was knocked over while MDP MPs sought to remove the Speaker’s chair, but was quickly returned to its original position.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Maldives could be a foretaste of the Arab Winter: Nasheed

Even after its democratic revolution in 2008, few saw the Maldives as a political trend-setter, writes former President Mohamed Nasheed for Foreign Policy magazine.

“Yet, in retrospect, the ousting of a 30-year dictatorship in a Muslim country was a precursor to the Arab Spring revolts that swept across the Middle East two years later. As in Libya, Egypt, Syria, and Tunisia, the Maldivians who took to the streets, confronting the regime’s riot police, and demanding change in 2008 were youthful, full of aspirations for a better economic future, and tired of the iron-fisted autocratic rule of a dictator – Maumoon Abdul Gayoom. I was elected president in the first-ever multi-party polls in the Maldives’ 2,500-year history, on a ticket of civil liberties, freedom of the press, and democratic change.

Fast-forward to this month, when the forces of autocracy in the Maldives staged a sudden and brutal coup d’etat. Rogue elements in the police and military joined together to seize the main television station, ransack the offices of the ruling Maldivian Democratic Party, and force my own resignation with threats of bloodshed. In the days that followed I, and many of my fellow democrats, were beaten and imprisoned, and the young democracy we have worked so hard to nurture has been left in mortal danger.

If the Maldives was a precursor to the Arab Spring, let us hope that it is not now a foretaste of a new Arab Winter. There is still time for democracy to recover in my country, but only if the wider world insists that a forceful coup against an elected government cannot be allowed to stand.

For the past three years, despite setbacks and sustained opposition from remnants of the old regime in the judiciary and parliament, things had been getting gradually better. My government inherited what the World Bank described as “the worst economic conditions of any country undergoing democratic reform since the 1950s,” yet with the help of the International Monetary Fund we managed to slash the budget deficit from 22 percent of gross domestic product (GDP) in 2009 to 9 percent last year.

Moreover, we were on track to deliver on nearly all of our election pledges: a public transport ferry system connecting all of our disparate islands was set up; a pension system for the elderly along with universal health insurance was put in place; the country’s first university was established; import duties on staple goods were removed; and drug addicts, of which the Maldives regrettably has many, were no longer treated as criminals but as victims in need of care and rehabilitation.

To help pay for the creation of a basic social safety net, a modern taxation system was also created. A “goods and services tax” was established, as was a corporation tax to provide a secure basis for government finances. And this year, we were planning to introduce a small income tax for the first time in the country’s history.

We also tried to reform the judiciary. Many judges remained under the effective control of the former regime and were blocking corruption and embezzlement cases involving members of Gayoom’s administration. This January, in a move that proved controversial, I ordered the military to arrest a notorious Criminal Court judge, who had quashed his own police arrest warrant, after he was found guilty of misconduct by the Judicial Services Commission – the body responsible for monitoring judges’ behavior.

The government requested the Commonwealth and the United Nations to intervene and help reform the judiciary root and branch. Following the arrest warrant, some of Gayoom’s supporters staged nightly protests calling for the judge’s release but the numbers protesting on the streets were small, just 200-400. Little did my government know the enormity of what they were plotting.

Read more

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Comment: Consensus the only way forward

The Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) has not served its cause for early polls nor has it covered its democratic credentials with glory when it stalled Male and stopped President Mohammed Waheed Hassan from delivering the customary annual address to Parliament on Friday, March 1.

For their part, the government parties, while commendable as their conduct was in not allowing themselves to be provoked both inside and outside parliament on the occasion, seem to have backtracked on the spirit of the India-facilitated roadmap consensus document on restoration by being vague on early polls to the presidency than when due in November 2013.

The alternative to consensus is utter chaos that Maldives now or ever could ill-afford. That was also the spirit of pragmatism that attended on the Indian concerns for encouraging the roadmap document and subsequent roadmap discussions. Political stability being the touchstone for progress of democracy in any community or country — and Maldives is a combination of both than in most – the roadmap provided for this and more. Or, else, the rest of the world with their vast democratic experience would not have endorsed the Indian initiative to recognise the alternate government of President Waheed after President Nasheed had announced a vacancy through a much-televised resignation, as provided for in the nation’s constitution. Both the US and China were in the list though the latter cannot be called democratic by any stretch of imagination.

Having encouraged defections in a 77-member parliament where it did not have the numbers after the 2009 elections, the MDP cannot complain about democracy-deficiency in the rest of the polity – greater or lesser be its concerns. Having taken to the streets and encouraging individual policemen and MNDF soldiers to join forces for demanding President Nasheed’s exit as numbers would not help his impeachment through a two-thirds vote in Parliament, the present ruling combine cannot blame the MDP for adopting similar tactics to drive home its demand. The consequent deadlock cannot be allowed to hold the nation to eternal ransom, which it will be if parliament does not meet in cooler climes to address irritants and issues which in fact had facilitated democracy-deficit in the first place.

Singing a different tune

The solution lies in between. The ruling parties of the day need to acknowledge that functional democracy is not possible without a parliamentary majority even with an Executive President at the head. The MDP in turn has to acknowledge that with only 34 memb4ers, up from the post-poll 27 but excluding the one disqualified by the Supreme Court after President Nasheed’s exit, it is still short of an absolute majority. At the bottom of the MDP’s problems, both parliamentary and political, while President Nasheed was in office was its failed strategy for the parliamentary elections. The party compromised healthy parliamentary precedents that it should have set, and encouraged questionable prosperity in individual members, which did cause eyebrows to rise when they decided to support the Nasheed Government in the past.

President Waheed’s government cannot continue with the perceived pitfalls from his predecessor’s time and expect to give a government different from that of President Nasheed, and hope to win over the masses (read: voters) ahead of the presidential polls. Having argued that all economic and fiscal measures of the Government would require a parliamentary approval when the MDP Government was in a minority, the anti-MDP group that now backs President Waheed cannot sing a different tune if and when they want to change what they call the ‘faulty economic policies’ of the predecessor, even if only to win over the masses.

The less said about the complexities attending on early elections the better. Having faulted constitutional institutions other than that of the Executive, represented exclusively by President Nasheed and his Cabinet, which in turn was tied down to parliamentary endorsement based on majorities, the MDP now cannot rush the nation into elections, and then complain all over again, if candidate Nasheed were to return to power once more. The alternative to working with the existing institutions at the time would be outright autocracy. The party says it shuns autocracy, and is not tired of referring to Nasheed’s predecessor, President Maumoon Abdul Gayoom, as one – even while the reference otherwise are to people who had once served the latter and have since found a place in President Waheed’s team.

Burden, not a boon?

The MDP needs to cool tempers — not just of its leadership and cadres, who feel indignant and frustrated at what they claim to be the forced exit of President Nasheed. They need time even more for cooling the tensions that had built up between the party, the government of President Nasheed and various institutions and arms thereof. The MNDF and the police force are main components of such a scheme, and without addressing the issues triggered by the ‘mutiny charge’ and frequent changes at the top with them, an MDP President could be a burden to the nation than a boon. The latter, not the former, should be the case, post-poll.

The MDP needs to give the nation and parliament time to rework the institutional framework as they exist, though not time enough for imbibing in them a new sense of purpose and direction expected of them in a democratic scheme. The latter would take a lot more of time, and Rome, after all was not built in day. Putting the cart before the horse will also be a lop-sided approach which could only upset the MDP apple-cart, and the larger cause even more in a fledgling democracy with its inherent and institutional problems that have already shown up for what they are worth — or, not worth.

The inherent problem to post-Gayoom democracy in Maldives owes to the kind of constitution that they all produced in haste in 2008, with the sole aim of getting the incumbent out of their way, and of the nation’s way, as they had thought. That many political parties that are now against the MDP and are thus in the Waheed dispensation, had worked with the MDP to have their way when Gayoom was the sole power-centre. Just because they have fallen out even before the ink on the constitutional document had dried up, they, together with the MDP, cannot expect the inherent institutional inadequacies, to drop out, too.

Today, the MDP still wants to keep the political ghost of Gayoom alive, to try and win another election. It refuses to understand that after three years in office, and wide publicity that a thinly spread-out nation had not seen before, the voter would be judging the MDP by President Nasheed’s tenure, and not by that of his predecessor, per se. The near-dignified conduct of the government parties to the MDP’s street protests and parliamentary behaviour is a silent message that the MDP should be reading, instead. This coupled with the cost of living and dollar-rate are among the issues agitating the voters, and would be more so than democracy issues, as flagged by the MDP, if only after a time from now.

Electoral agenda

At the end of the day, both the MDP and its opponents in government are working on narrow political, rather electoral agendas, and are not on a national manifesto that the constitution still enshrines. The MDP would want to strike the electoral iron when people’s memory is still hot on the democracy and injustice issues that it now flags. The party does not seem to have the confidence to go back to the voters, based on its claims to be a better government than its predecessor. The government parties are also aware of the MDP strategy, and seem to be working with the sole aim of denying the MDP the pleasure of early elections.

The government parties also have the problem of having to decide early on about their own strategy for fresh presidential elections, and would want that date pushed as far back as possible. It would have been a different ball-game had presidential polls come in their natural course. The focus would then have been on President Nasheed and his completed five-year term. The question now is whether they would want to contest the first round of presidential polls independently or collectively, or in different combinations – and re-work their strategies for the second, run-off round, if they are confident of a second round in the first place. The last time round, all anti-Gayoom parties contested alone in the first round, but pooled their votes in favour of Nasheed, the first runner-up to give the latter his first electoral entry into the nation’s politics.

If the parties decide to go it alone now again, political morals dictate that their representatives on an otherwise apolitical Cabinet pull out before the presidential polls. One alternative to the possibility is to talk the MDP into joining what truly should be a ‘national unity government’, as propagated by President Waheed on assuming office, but not necessarily afterward. The other and worse alternative would be for the incumbent President to reconstitute his Cabinet, and yet hope that Parliament would clear the names.

It is a pre-requisite of the times that Parliament clear President Waheed’s team, as the Government parties had insisted upon when President Nasheed was in office. With Independents still holding key to a parliamentary majority, it could mean a lot in terms of compromises, if not corruption charges for purchasing their loyalties, which could at best be issue-based, and for obvious reasons. This is not the kind of democracy that Maldives and Maldivians deserve.

The ruling parties now have to record with appreciation the successive climb-downs that the anguished and aggressive MDP has made since President Nasheed’s exit. The peaceful conduct of successive rallies after the first one 24 hours after the exit had turned violent, should be a case in point. Maldives cannot even afford the police force clashing with the MDP cadres, and contributing to the continuance of peace in political rallies has become a condition-precedent for the Maldivian State to maintain a semblance of order and structure than at any time in the past decades. The alternative could be outright anarchy, and the dividing line is too thin for the nation to strain.

Likewise, the MDP has also begun participating in the roadmap talks, for which it had earlier laid pre-conditions. It may be true that the party has used the talks only to drive home its demand for early polls, and nothing more, it would soon (have to) realise how it needs the rest as they may need the party. Again, it can settle for a continued deadlock the kind of which that started the nation at the face under President Nasheed in 2010. This time round, however, such a deadlock could mean that the presidential polls may not become due until November 2013 — which is against the party’s demands and expectations.

There is a consensus that a new President should have a full five-year term, and not the residual term for which President Nasheed was elected in 2008 and a part of which President Waheed is now entitled under the Constitution. The MDP needs to acknowledge that it needs the rest of them all to have the constitution amended with a two-thirds vote, to facilitate an early election that they want. Not having compromised on issues in Parliament in the past, and having deflected the nation’s focus from one issue to another, the party may now find it difficult to take firm positions on the Roadmap even if in terms of reaching where it wants to reach.

Parliament, and not Male’s street, is the venue, and nothing is going to change inside the Chamber beyond a point by pressures from outside. If that were so, it would have happened even when President Nasheed was in office. Hoping to play the old game and paint President Waheed’s team as a revival of President Gayoom’s ‘autocracy’ has not convinced anyone who mattered elsewhere. It would remain so even more. The MDP, more than the rest, has to learn to work with other elements in a democracy and the government in a democracy. Possibly because they have to live down their ‘autocratic past’, the rest of them all seem to be less judgmental or unit-directional than the MDP.

Learning from others mistakes

It is unfortunate that mischievous sections tended to attribute motives to Indian Foreign Secretary Ranjan Mathai’s reported reference to the Roadmap propositions at the all-party meeting that he was invited to attend by President Waheed, during his second and more recent visit to Maldives after the political crisis blew up in the first week of February. As Indian officials have already clarified and explained, Secretary Mathai was only referring to the roadmap that all of them had agreed upon during his previous visit, and which the all-party conference chair too had circulated for fixing priority. That was the crux of the matter, and not the Indian position, of which there was none.

Coming from the world’s largest and equally complex of democracies, Foreign Secretary Mathai’s prescriptions, if any, would have been the quintessence of the Indian experience and exposure to a scheme that was alien to the shared sub-continental pride and traditions. Maldives can learn from other people’s mistakes. Alternatively, it could learn the lessons by going through the birth-pangs of democracy itself, which the nation anyway cannot avoid after a point, despite external prescriptions to induce pain at appropriate times and extinguish the same on other occasions. It is for Maldives and Maldivians to decide which, what and when they want them -and how, and how much of each. The rest of it all would follow, as if they were a natural course.

The writer is a Senior Fellow at Observer Research Foundation.

All comment pieces are the sole view of the author and do not reflect the editorial policy of Minivan News. If you would like to write an opinion piece, please send proposals to [email protected]

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Parliament cancelled after demonstrations by MDP MPs, protesters

Parliament was cancelled after Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) MPs blocked Speaker Abdulla Shahid from entering the chamber, in protest against an address that was to be given by President Dr Mohamed Hassan Waheed.

At a press conference on Wednesday evening, Shahid said he was unable enter the chamber despite several attempts, and on one occasion had fallen and injured himself. Given the current political tensions, Shahid said he was unable to guarantee the safety of members and had decided to proceed through negotiation, rather than force.

Shahid further condemned MDP’s disruption and said it was unhealthy given the current political climate.

With the exception of the streets around parliament, which were locked down by police and military officers, the streets of Male’ were eerily quiet this morning.

In the narrow alleys around parliament, protesters gathered and put pressure on police lines. The largest demonstration gathered around a group of women, some wearing face masks and goggles, who sat down in front of police at an intersection on Sosun Magu. The small group of police blocking the street to parliament appeared anxious but tolerant, and the mood was peaceful.

Roads blocked by police

Earlier this morning, police reported that four officers were hospitalised with serious injuries after protesters attempted to break through police lines near the Wood Apple and threw stones and poles. A further 10 officers suffered minor injuries before the area was reinforced by the military.

“44 people have been arrested and police have the area controlled,” said Sub-Inspector Ahmed Shiyam. A subsequent SMS from police suggested that some of those arrested were to be tested for possible intoxication.

As of 1:00pm there had been no reports of protesters injured, and Minivan News observed police showing restraint in holding back largely peaceful crowds.

MDP MP sitting on the Speaker's table

Inside parliament, MDP MPs – who make up 34 of the 77 member chamber, after the Supreme Court disqualified MP Mohamed Mustafa last week – were blocking the Speaker of Parliament, Abdulla Shahid from entering. Images being tweeted by MPs inside showed MDP MPs sitting on the Speaker’s table at the front of the chamber. MPs barricaded the doors and removed the chairs intended for the Speaker and Dr Waheed.

Shahid and a member of the Inter Parliamentary Union (IPU)  reportedly spoke with MPs to try and resolve the stand-off, while Haveeru reported that Indian High Commissioner D M Mulay was seen leaving the parliamentary office.

Telephone and internet connections inside parliament were reported to have been cut.

MDP made the decision to obstruct Dr Waheed’s address after the India-sanctioned ‘roadmap’ talks failed to produce an election date. A week of talks had established a seven point agenda, which included setting an election date and discussing necessary constitutional reforms, but no order of preference was agreed in yesterday’s meetings.

Rhetoric from key government figures, including Dr Waheed, has meanwhile suggested that they favour elections as normal in 2013. The MDP maintains that Mohamed Nasheed was ousted in a bloodless coup on February 7, and that Dr Waheed’s government is illegitimate.

Updates:

1:21: President Waheed’s Press Secretary Masood Imad said Dr Waheed remaining inside parliament waiting for the opportunity to give his address, but said MDP MPs had occupied the chamber and were obstructing the chamber.

2:20: Crowds in the streets outside parliament heated but non-violent. Chief of Defence Force Major General Ahmed Shiyam and Police Commissioner Abdulla Riyaz are reportedly conducting a meeting inside parliament, along with some members of Dr Waheed’s new cabinet.

2:55: The United States Embassy in Colombo has issued a statement expressing concern at the “disorderly protests in Malé and disruption of the opening session of the Majlis.”

“The US attaches great importance to our friendly relations with Maldives. We have welcomed the efforts of all sides to participate in a dialogue on a democratization process that could create the conditions for early elections. As the Majlis session opens, the United States encourages all parties to continue to work collaboratively and peacefully toward a solution as agreed with the Roadmap document, and not allow violence to further complicate the situation. The United States will continue to support Maldives in this process, and we stand ready to provide technical assistance on elections. In the interests of all Maldivians, we urge the parties to work together in a constructive and cooperative manner to reach agreement.”

5:30: A press conference has been called in parliament.

5:50: Spokesperson for India’s Ministry of External Affairs, Syed Akbaruddin,  said at a press conference that India’s “Foreign Secretary was [in the Maldives] to facilitate among Maldivian parties the next steps in trying to resolve this issue. The issue that remains contentious and that is the only issue left on the table is the date of elections. There were some that wanted the date to be announced prior to the Majlis and some wanted it to be dicussed inside the Majlis. As far as India is concerned, we are okay if there is discussion inside the Majlis or any other forum that they find suitable.”

6:00: Reports of MDP MPs being warned they would be removed by the military if they continued to disrupt the session.

6:30: MDP MPs Ibrahim Rasheed and Mohamed Shifaz have reportedly been removed from the parliament chamber by the military.

6:45: Rasheed was let back into the chamber after MDP Parlimentary Group Leader Ibu Solih negotiated with the Sergeant-at-arms.

7:00: A press conference that was earlier cancelled is back on.

7:30: Speaker Abdulla Shahid has announced the cancellation of the parliament session, after MDP MPs refused to let him into the chamber. On the last attempt Shahid said he fell and hurt himself slightly. The next session is scheduled for Monday.

8:00: President Waheed, Dr Mohamed Jameel and Azima Shukoor holding a press conference imminently.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

The Maldives and the Arab Spring: Institute of Development Studies

A number of recent editorials have referred to the recent coup in the Maldives as the undoing of the country’s own ‘Arab Spring,’ which began with the landmark 2008 elections that brought to an end 30 years of autocratic rule, write Gabriele Koehler and Aniruddha Bonnerjee for the Institute of Development Studies.

Indeed, while the status of democratic process in the Maldives more closely resembles other South Asian nations than nations involved in the Arab uprising, economic and social strains in the Maldives are akin to those that preceded the Arab Spring.

Economically and socially, there are three Maldives:

‘Maldives I’ is that of the sparkling tourist resorts isolated from the rest of the country on coral islands. Tourism is the Maldives’ largest industry and resort leasers represent a substantial and powerful economic interest group. The other Maldives are local economies.

‘Maldives II’ is made up of 1,192 islands dispersed across 90,000 square kilometres, where 205,000 Maldivians make a living from coastal fishing and related occupations.

‘Maldives III’ is the capital island of Malé, home to 103 thousand and one of the most densely populated places in the world.

Under the autocratic Gayoom regime, the Maldives made substantial progress on education and health criteria, despite the high costs of delivering services to widely-scattered islands. By 2000, the country had achieved universal primary and lower-secondary education and had almost eliminated communicable diseases.

In 2008, the central challenge for the newly-democratic government under President Nasheed was to maintain good performance on social services despite a high fiscal budget debt. At the same time, the global financial crisis affected the tourism sector as well as domestic prices of food and energy.

In response, Nasheed’s government focused on expanding inter-island transport, universalising health insurance, protecting the social sectors (health, education, child and family welfare) while trimming the public sector bill. It sought investment through a programme of public-private partnerships.

The financial strategy revolved around monetising the deficit, seeking grants and loans from donors, and rescheduling medium and long term debt obligations. Combined with rising food and fuel prices, this strategy fuelled inflation. Political opposition and low capacity restricted other reforms.

Read more

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Islamic Ministry bans construction work during Friday prayer time

The Ministry of Islamic Affairs have Ministry has ordered that construction not be carried out during Friday prayer time.

“We will do everything necessary to end such practices,” newly-appointed Minister of Islamic Affairs, Sheikh Mohamed Shaheem Ali Saeed was reported as saying in local media. “Working during Friday prayer time is not accepted in the Maldives. Even work carried out by non-muslims must be stopped for Friday prayers.”

The Ministry said in a statement: “We would like to remind our brothers and sisters that continuing to work during Friday prayer time is against the Quran and Sunnah.”

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)