Politics – Page 630 – Minivan News

Former president accuses government of obstructing his social work

The secretariat of the former president has accused senior government officials of blocking funding for his office and attempting to obstruct its work.

A press release issued by the office of former President Maumoon Abdul Gayoom states that it was created on 11 December 2009 under legislation passed t last year by parliament to provide protection and privileges for former presidents.

“Under article eight of the law on protection and privileges for former presidents, the state has to arrange up to Rf175,000 a month for an office, employees and ‘other matters’ for former presidents ‘should they want to’ do social work of benefit to community,” reads the press statement.

It adds that the legislation leaves the formation of the office to the discretion of former presidents, and not parliament or the government.

Article 140 states, “A member of the cabinet shall be given responsibility for each authority or institute established by government or the People’s Majlis, except for independent institutions specified in this constitution or established pursuant to a law.”

However the statement adds that “it is clear” that a cabinet minister does not have to be responsible for the office and moreover, it was “regrettable” that senior government officials were claiming that the former president did not have the authority to create such an office and were “attempting to obstruct” the work of the former president.

Speaking to Minivan News today, Hassan Afeef, political advisor to President Mohamed Nasheed, denied the president’s office was obstructing the social work of the former president.

“What he has to do first is state what kind of social work he wants to do and then inform the relevant authority – that is the finance ministry,” Afeef said.

When the request was made with the finance ministry, he said, it will issue funds depending on the type of work and the number of employees needed.

Afeef argued that the office would be created by a law passed by parliament and therefore would be overseen by a ministry.

Since the law clearly states that funds should be issued for “social work” the former president must specify the kind of work he wants to undertake.

“I don’t understand why he is trying to do everything by using power instead of respecting the law,” he said.

Likes

(0)Dislikes

(0)

President appears on live radio call-in show

President Mohmaed Nasheed took questions from the public on DhiFM’s one-to-one programme on Friday, the first ever live call-in radio show featuring a sitting president.

The president addressed a number of issues and answered questions on subjects ranging from the government’s pledges, the electricity tariff hike and media subsidies.

Hundreds of questions in the days before the show via email and text messages.

On his New Year resolution, the president said, “My determination and goal is finding ways to fulfil the government’s key electoral pledges.”

Some political parties wanted to overthrow the government, he said, but it could only be done within the bounds of the law.

On media subsidies, the president said he did not favour adding to recurrent expenditure and praised private broadcasters for their efficient operations with a small number of staff.

Asked about the government’s pledge to provide affordable housing, he said an agreement had been reached with India’s Tata Company but the project was delayed due to a dispute over the 11 per cent interest proposed by the company.

The government wanted to ensure that citizens would not have to pay more than Rf3,500 a month for the housing units, he said.

He added the government hoped to sign contracts with five companies this month to construct 4,000 housing units.

The president said he regrets that electricity tariffs had to be increased after he pledged not to do so during the campaign.

Apologising to citizens, Nasheed said the hike was temporary and referred to targeted subsidies introduced for poor income families.

On the campaign pledge to hold a mid-term presidential election, the president said the thinking behind it was to assess the political landscape in the country after emerging from a dictatorship where free and fair elections could not be guaranteed.

But, he added, the first opportunity to take stock of the support for political parties came during last year’s parliamentary elections.

“All political parties contested. Those who advocated for a mid-term election won only two seats. And of all those two seats, it is questionable to what extent they belong to the party,” he said.

Following the first round of the October 2008 presidential election, all opposition parties united around the Maldivian Democratic Party candidate and formed a coalition to end the 30-year rule of President Maumoon Abdul Gayoom.

Of the coalition partners, Dr Hassan Saeed, former presidential candidate and attorney general, now of the Dhivehi Qaumee Party, pushed the most for a mid-term election.

Nasheed said the parliamentary elections last year six months after the presidential election showed that support for the ruling MDP had not diminished.

In the May parliamentary elections, MDP won 51,184 votes while the main opposition Dhivehi Rayyithunge Party won 40,886 votes.

In his radio address on the same day, the president highlighted progress made on fulfilling the government’s five main pledges.

Transport networks had been established in some provinces, he said, while contracts will be signed for the remaining provinces.

He added the government was confident of completing a project for 1,000 housing units within this year.

The amount of drugs seized during the past year exceeded the previous three to four years, he said.

Moreover, two detoxification centres were established under the government’s policy of focusing on treatment and rehabilitation.

Providing universal health insurance under the Madhana programme will eliminate the practice of “begging for healthcare”.

It was essential to reduce the budget deficit to curb inflation, he continued, and the government had to reduce recurrent expenditure to bring down the deficit.

Likes

(0)Dislikes

(0)

Clemency bill passed

Parliament passed legislation on clemency and commuting sentences during its last sitting of the year on Thursday before breaking for a two-month recess.

The bill proposed by the government to set guidelines for the president to grant pardons and commute sentences was passed with 59 votes in favour and two against.

Presenting the committee report, Kulhudhufushi South MP Mohamed Nasheed, chairman of the home affairs committee, said views expressed by MPs during the debate were incorporated in the final draft.

Among the changes made by the committee include adding a provision for aiding interpretation in determining if convicts have exhausted the appeal process, specifying crimes that will not be eligible for pardon and creating a clemency board chaired by the attorney general to advise the president.

The committee further added provisions to authorise the president to commute death sentences to life imprisonment as well as detailing criteria on granting pardons, said Nasheed.

Moreover, criminal records of those convicted under the old constitution would be wiped clean if they were pardoned.

Article 115 of the constitution states the president has the authority “to grant pardons or reductions of sentence as provided by law, to persons convicted of a criminal offence who have no further right of appeal.”

Under the legislation, convicts who did not get a fair trial and those who have exhausted the appeal process will be eligible for release.

Of the 11 amendments proposed to the bill, only four were passed.

In the debate after voting on amendments, MPs stressed the importance of the legislation to grant pardons for people in jail who were wrongfully convicted or sentenced solely on the basis of extracted confessions.

But, several MPs said the president should exercise caution and good judgment in commuting sentences and granting pardons.

In its 82 sittings since being convened in May, parliament has passed eight bills and adopted five resolutions, while 19 bills remain pending at the committee stage.

Likes

(0)Dislikes

(0)

From “Anni” to “H.E.P”

“You know, they said this day would never come. They said our sights were set too high. They said that this country was too divided; too disillusioned to ever come together around a common purpose.”

So spoke Barack Obama on the night that he won the Iowa caucuses. It was the night that he proved he could win the presidency by claiming victory in a largely white state.

These are words that could have easily been spoken by Mohamed Nasheed (Anni) when he won last year’s presidential election.

People try to put us down

When Anni and other reformists first launched the Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) many did not believe that it had a chance of succeeding. After all, Maumoon Abdul Gayoom’s government was all-powerful and exercised a huge degree of control over society.

Anni himself was seen as a figure who did not “look” like a president and thus would be unable to mobilize support in a country which was still deemed too conservative. This partly explains why MDP opted to go for a dual leadership structure, with a party president and a chairman. Ibrahim Ismail and Mohamed Munavvar both served as party president but did not manage to make much headway.

Anni and MDP were seen as too divisive. This led to all opposition forces trying to unite behind one candidate, with both Hassan Saeed and Gasim Ibrahim vying for that spot. Dr. Ahmed Shaheed, speaking on behalf of Saeed tried to convince Anni to stand aside by asking whether Maldivians were more likely to vote for “foreigners” like the two of them, or for a “mullah” like Saeed.

Despite all this, against the odds, Anni managed to cobble together a victory in the presidential election. Many people familiar with the political spectrum would not have believed that it was possible. The election was, in many ways, a fairy tale. Or, as GQ magazine described it, a “momentous victory of belief against chaos.”

Talking ‘bout my generation

Since assuming power President Nasheed has further confounded critics by fitting into the role in a refreshing way. He has scaled back on the pomp and ceremony that Gayoom enjoyed. He fits in comfortably with the new, younger generation.

People now accept that the presidency is defined more by the strength of the occupant’s character than by gaudy displays of wealth and power. Nasheed walks to work everyday and is in the habit of making appearances at places like Al Fresco and the local market. “It’s better for the environment and I can stop and chat to people on the way,” explained Nasheed.

By all accounts, Nasheed takes a very business-like approach to government and gets deeply involved in policy issues. This has come as a bit of a surprise to opponents who subscribed to the school of thought that activism and intelligence could not coexist in one person.

The president’s hands-on approach was evident this Friday on DhiFM’s “One to One” show. It was the first time that a sitting president took questions from the public in a live radio show. Nasheed displayed a firm grasp of the issues as he engaged in a lively discussion with the programme’s host and those that phoned in.

Nasheed has managed to balance competing interests, keep the government in one piece, deliver on a few manifesto pledges; and all this while averting an economic collapse despite the empty treasury he inherited.

“It is one of life’s ironies that it falls upon this government led by a party, as has been criticized, accused of being activists with little experience of governing, to put the house back in order,” the president declared to a meeting of donors.

With twenty percent of his term up, the accusation that Nasheed is somehow not “qualified” no longer holds up. That his bachelor’s degree in maritime studies is the least mentioned line in his biography is unsurprising. After all, it seems to have had the least effect on his political career. Solitary confinement, exile, journalism, the study of Maldivian history, and the experience of starting a movement and managing a political party are what really inform his decisions.

Domestic bliss

And what has been achieved in one year? Better governance: corruption has been curbed and there is greater transparency. The influence of gangs, which are believed to have been in an unholy alliance with the former regime, has diminished.

An independent Anti-Corruption Commission and empowered customs and police services have seen the rule of law strengthened. The fact that more drugs have been seized during the last year than in the preceding five is testament to the work of these institutions.

The country is also closer to seeing real social justice. The old welfare system which was controlled by the presidential palace and saw much of the benefits go to family and cronies has been abolished. A new social protection programme provides a pension of Rf2,000 to all those over 65 years of age.

In what is a significant step for the government’s affordable healthcare pledge, about half the adult population of the country has been signed up for the Madhana insurance scheme. While utility tariffs are being raised in order to help plug the deficit, targeted subsidies are ensuring that the poor do not slip through the net.

Steps have also been taken to foster a climate for economic development. A responsible economic framework has been established with the assistance of the IMF. This involved tough political decisions which the former regime avoided taking. Rather than financing development projects through the budget, they are to be implemented through public-private partnerships (PPPs).

An early success story can already be seen. Transport networks, one of the MDP’s key pledges, have been established in two provinces and have brought markets and services closer to the local communities.

International affairs

President Nasheed’s star has really shone on the international stage. Seeing their foe being elevated to the role of global statesman has been a particular source of ire for his critics.

Since taking office, Nasheed has forged close links with democratic India, spent a night at Windsor Castle with Queen Elizabeth II, gave an impassioned plea for action against climate change at the United Nations General Assembly, addressed the Annual Conference of the British Conservative Party, grabbed the world’s headlines with an underwater cabinet meeting, scooped up the Anna Lindh Memorial Prize for Human Rights and Climate Change, been named Time magazine’s leading Hero of the Environment, and negotiated a $92 million dollar fiscal adjustment programme from the IMF.

Yet, all this pales in comparison to the Maldives’ role at the COP15 summit held in Copenhagen. With the talks on the brink of collapse, Nasheed and the Maldives delegation acted as a bridge between the developing and developed countries as they sought to come up with a compromise that would allow the process to carry on at the next COP summit to be held in Cancun, Mexico.

The leaders of the industrialized nations recognized that the support of the Maldives was essential if such an agreement was to be brokered and decided to invite Nasheed to the small group of 28 countries known as the “circle of commitment”.

What transpired in that room has since been leaked in The Guardian; that it was China and it’s proxies in the G77- led by its chief negotiator Lumumba Stanislaus-Kaw Di-Aping of Sudan (incidentally, one of the most brutal countries on earth) that wrecked the chances for a stronger agreement is now well known.

So what benefits have the president’s performance at COP15 brought to the Maldives? For a start, cash for adaptation measures: $30 billion in short term aid from the developed countries spread out over the next three years. It gets better in the long term with a commitment to raise the figure to $100 billion by 2020. The Maldives will get a large share as it is a vulnerable, small island state.

However, the diplomatic achievement is much more valuable. Nasheed has now guaranteed his place as one of the key global figures on climate change with access to all the world leaders that matter. His voice will be an important one in the fight against climate change in the months and years to come.

Great Expectations

This assessment began with a parallel to the 44th American president, and it ends on a similar note. In many ways, the situation this country’s 4th president finds himself in is not much different: universally adored abroad, met with a sceptical and divided country at home.

Both face bitter political enemies who question their legitimacy and are bent on disrupting their agendas. They face demanding coalition partners with whom they are forced to compromise with. And to top it off, the weight of expectation from the people who voted for them has been immense.

This balancing act is not a situation either of them would have wished for; but their actions show that it is a reality that they are comfortable with.

Playing with the hand you are dealt whilst not losing sight of the long-term objective is what this is all about. And it is in this sense that Anni and His Excellency the President have proved to be not so different after all.

Likes

(0)Dislikes

(0)

Government withdraws decentralisation bill

The government has withdrawn the bill on decentralised administration after parliament reached an impasse on the controversial model of provinces in the proposed legislation.

At today’s sitting of parliament, Speaker Abdullah Shahid said the president’s office sent a letter informing him of the decision.

“Since it has become difficult to continue Majlis sittings due to disagreements among MPs on the bill on decentralised administration and as the public and political parties have requested that it be withdrawn, the president’s office said the bill was withdrawn to be submitted again in the first Majlis session of 2010 after making amendments following consultations with the public and political parties,” he said.

Intractable

Four sittings have been cancelled over the past three days after the opposition-dominated committee selected to review the legislation presented its report with an amendment to scrap provinces.

The third and final reading of the bill where MPs propose and vote on amendments could not be continued after heated rows, points of order and unsuccessful negotiations forced the speaker to call off sittings.

Over 700 amendments were tabled, the majority from MPs of the ruling Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) to reverse the changes made by the committee.

While MDP MPs argued the opposition was infringing on the government’s prerogative of implementing its agenda, MPs of the Dhivehi Rayyithunge Party (DRP) maintained that dividing the 21 administrative areas to seven provinces was unconstitutional.

Under the government’s bill, they argued, an atoll council would be elected from a province that includes three or four atolls, leading to unequal representation.

Islanders from the less populous atolls would have to travel to the province capital for essential services, they said.

Moreover, the legislation would give provincial state ministers undue authority and influence over elected councils, including the power to dissolve the bodies.

Chapter eight of the constitution stipulates that “the administrative divisions of the Maldives shall be administered decentrally”, while giving the president powers “as provided in law, to create constituencies, posts, island councils, atoll councils and city councils”.

Article 230(c) states “the jurisdiction and characteristics of constituencies, posts and councils created to provide for decentralised administration shall be specified in law”.

Economies of scale

Speaking at the inauguration of the Maldives National Defence Force (MNDF) Male’ Area last night, President Mohamed Nasheed defended the government’s decentralisation policy.

Concentration of power and development in Male’ has led to congestion and neglect of the atolls, said Nasheed, adding devolving decision-making powers were necessary for the equitable distribution of wealth and prosperity.

But, he added, it was the government’s responsibility to pursue decentralisation in a manner agreed upon by all parties.

While he respected the DRP’s main proposal, the government believed electoral constituencies should be grouped together for administrative purposes.

The president said 54 per cent of the people endorsed the MDP manifesto and its policy of dividing the country into seven regions or provinces.

“It was impossible for a single island or atoll to develop in the manner in which a province could develop exploiting 40 per cent of its income and natural resources,” he said. “Decentralised governance through regionalisation will not be a win for any specific political party. In reality it will be a victory for the Maldives.”

Economies of scale would only be possible through the creation of provinces, he argued, and the government’s legislation proposed granting authority of 40 per cent of a province’s income to the councils.

Economies of scale refer to the benefits of large scale operations when more units of a good or service can be produced while decreasing the average cost of production.

Public interest

When parliament resumed at 2.30pm yesterday, MDP MPs as well as the Republican Party and Dhivehi Qaumee Party (DQP) MPs urged the government to withdraw the legislation.

Maamigili MP Gasim Ibrahim, the sole representative of the Republican Party, said the bill should be withdrawn in the interests of social harmony and allowing parliament to proceed with other legislation.

Supporters of the two main parties gathered outside parliament to protest yesterday, leading to the arrest of activists from both sides. However, all who were taken into custody have since been released.

Gasim urged the president to exercise article 115(p) of the constitution and hold a public referendum on the issue of provinces.

The article authorises the president to hold referendums “on issues of national importance”.

Vilufushi MP Riyaz Rasheed of the DQP reiterated the MDP criticism of the committee, invoking parliamentary rules of procedure that state committees could not make amendments that conflict with or negate the purpose of a bill.

“Therefore, considering the public interest and the rivalry of the two political parties, I would say the best thing would be for the government to take this bill back,” he said.

MDP parliamentary group leader “Reeko” Moosa Manik said the amended bill presented by the committee did not resemble the one proposed by the government at all.

Moosa called upon the government to withdraw the bill as it would not be able to pursue its policies or deliver on its promises with the committee’s version of the legislation.

At today’s sitting DRP MPs blamed the government and the MDP parliamentary group for the failure to pass the decentralisation bill as the constitutional deadline for local elections had elapsed in July.

Likes

(0)Dislikes

(0)

Civil servants’ salaries to be restored

The Civil Service Commission (CSC) has decided to restore salaries and allowances of civil servants to its levels before the pay cuts enforced in October.

A circular issued by the commission yesterday states that the cuts were made on the request of the president and the finance ministry, which informed CSC it did not have enough funds in the budget for employees’ remuneration.

“Since the finance minister had estimated in the state budget for 2010 submitted to the People’s Majlis that government revenue would exceed Rf7 billion (US$544 million) and because the commission does not believe reduction of civil servants’ salaries for three months could be prolonged as a measure due to the economic circumstances facing the country…the commission has decided that civil servants will receive the full salaries determined for their posts from 1 January 2010,” it announced.

It adds that government offices and departments have been informed of the decision.

Following negotiations with the finance ministry in September, the CSC imposed pay cuts under clause 43(c) of its regulations, which authorises the commission to alter salaries subject to a three-month review based on “special economic circumstances”.

When pay cuts of up to 20 per cent were enforced in October, the commission and the finance ministry agreed that the economic circumstances would be considered over when the government’s annual income increases beyond Rf7 billion.

Special circumstances

Speaking to Minivan News today, Adam Zahir, a member of the executive committee of the Maldives Civil Servants’ Association, said parliament made amendments to include additional funds in the budget to restore salaries and the CSC has now said it will follow the budget.

Parliament passed the budget for 2010 with an additional Rf617.6 million (US$48 million) to restore the salaries.

“I believe we have now got 100 per cent guarantee that salaries will be restored,” he said. “But, with the way things have been going, we will believe it when it happens.”

MPs had informed the association that were enough funds in the original budget to pay the salaries, he continued, but now it has been confirmed “in a more certain and transparent way”.

Zahir said the association found it hard to accept the “special economic circumstances” because of the government’s actions and failure of either independent institutions, parliament or the judiciary to enforce similar pay cuts.

The administration continuing to make political appointees “showed that the money was there”.

Moreover, he said, both MPs and independent institutions have refused to accept the special circumstances and the government has not adequately proven that the situation warranted the austerity measures.

“So we don’t believe it because the people who would know these things best don’t believe it either,” he said.

Austerity measures

In August, the government announced it would be introducing a raft of austerity measures, including reduction of overtime, cutting down the number of overseas trips and releasing government rented properties where possible, to alleviate an inherited budget deficit.

In addition to civil service wage cuts, the president said he planned to halve the 32,000-strong civil service by 2011.

Both decisions caused an angry backlash from opposition parties who petitioned the CSC to refuse the wage cuts, which they argued would adversely impact the lives of many citizens.

In his maiden speech at the 64th UN General Assembly on Thursday, President Mohamed Nasheed said the Maldives had “suffered badly” from the global economic recession.

“Moreover, since assuming office, it has become clear to us that in the run-up to last year’s election, the former government engaged in highly irresponsible economic policies in the hope of buying their way to victory,” he said.

Nasheed said government planned to tackle the economic crisis by reducing the civil service, privatising public utilities, and promoting private enterprise and trade.

Likes

(0)Dislikes

(0)

Protests outside parliament as parties face off

Supporters of both the ruling Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) and opposition Dhivehi Rayyithunge Party (DRP) protested outside parliament today while MPs remained deadlocked over the decentralisation bill.

Protesters from the two rival parties gathered behind police lines on opposite ends of the road with megaphones and loudspeakers, responding to each other’s taunts.

Like the four previous sittings, today’s sitting was also called off, making it the third consecutive day of cancellation following heated rows between MPs.

Competing protests

“Abdullah Shahid – resign! The corrupt deputy speaker – resign,” chanted the large group of MDP activists behind police barricades.

They called on MPs to pass the legislation with the government’s proposed model of dividing the country into seven provinces.

The opposition dominated committee selected to review the bill voted to scrap provinces, prompting MDP to propose over 700 amendments to reverse the changes.

A DRP protest led by a small group of supporters outside the president’s office was disrupted by police.

But the DRP activists gathered outside parliament to continue the protest.

“Ganjabo [pothead] – resign! Beer drinker – resign! Kenereege [President Mohamed] Nasheed who has hijacked the People’s Majlis – resign!” they hollered.

Meanwhile, on the other side, MDP supporters accused the former government of ignoring the atolls in favour of concentrating development in Male’.

“Give us 40 per cent of the resources in our area and we won’t come here to beg for healthcare, for a harbour, for housing,” yelled the activist with the megaphone.

Ahmed Shareef, 36, a senior DRP activist, told Minivan News opposition supporters were protesting because the government’s division of the country into seven provinces was unconstitutional and intended to weaken the people.

“The MDP members in Majlis have been working to rob the people of their rights,” he said. “I condemn it strongly. The people’s representatives should not be acting that way.”

During the parliamentary debate, opposition MPs argued grouping three or four atoll into a province was unconstitutional as 21 administrative areas were clearly defined in the appendix.

While the constitution required atoll councils to be elected from within the atoll, they said, the government’s bill would elect a province council with unequal representation.

But, MDP MPs argued the constitution left the model of decentralisation up to legislation to be passed by parliament, while economies of scale would not be possible if decision-making powers were devolved to single atolls.

Brutality?

Shareef said the police employed force and used pepper spray to disrupt the DRP protest outside the president’s office.

All three activists who were taken into custody have since been released.

“They took us by force without any warning, used pepper spray on us and put us in handcuffs,” he said, showing bruises on his body.

He added the current government was “dictatorial” and needed to be changed.

Shareef said the protest will continue tonight when parliament is scheduled to restart at 8.30pm.

‘Malini’ Ibrahim Ahmed, 41, an MDP activist, said he was disappointed with the way police handled the protest.

“They used force, they used pepper spray and cuffed people’s hands behind them,” he said.

But, he added, all MDP activists taken into custody were shortly released.

Police Sergeant Ahmed Shiyam said a number of people who refused to comply with orders were taken into custody, but no one was arrested.

In the early stages of the protest, when MDP supporters sat down in front of parliament, police forcibly moved them back, picking off a number of activists in the process.

One man was taken into custody after he accused an officer of using pepper spray without provocation. “You watch out, I’ll beat you up,” he said.

The riot police immediately jumped on the man, citing regulations which empower police to arrest anyone who threatens an officer of the law.

Cancellation

Starting off today’s sitting, Deputy Speaker Ahmed Nazim said MPs could either vote on the amendments or the government could withdraw the legislation.

While MDP had requested negotiations and submitted proposals, he continued, the DRP has refused to engage in discussions.

Negotiations were ongoing between the MDP and the Speaker, he said.

Some MPs have recommended calling a public referendum to decide the issue of provinces.

After numerous points of order, Nazim called out the names of five MDP MPs who refused to sit down, invoking the power of the chair to remove them from the chamber.

But, all MDP MPs were on their feet and protesting loudly, leading Nazim to cancel the sitting.

Mid-Fuahmulah MP Shifaq Mufeed, Baarah MP Mohamed Shifaz, Hoarafushi MP Ahmed Rasheed, Machangoalhi South MP Mohamed Rasheed and Ihavandhoo MP Ahmed Abdullah were ordered to leave the chamber.

Likes

(0)Dislikes

(0)

Comment: Why some people like DRP and hate the MDP

My first assignment at university, back in 1997, asked me to look into why people voted the way they do.

I remember feeling quite ill-prepared to answer this question because I had never experienced voting in its true democratic form. After all I grew up in the Maldives.

However, I came to realise that it boils down to a combination of personal characteristics, particular circumstances and the choice of leaders, as well as the image of these leaders put across to the public.

In 2008, faced with a choice between the DRP and the MDP, it is not difficult to see who someone such as I would pick.

I am (relatively) young, and as such I am prone to taking risks. I feel comfortable with a changing world. I have a tertiary education from a western institution. I am starting off in life, have no family who relies on me to provide for them, have no business that I have poured my heart and soul into, and feel confident that I have the skills to make it in life. My philosophy to change is summed up by the other iconic saying of our time: “Yes we can!”.

You don’t have to be Don Draper to realize which product I’m buying.

But what continues to fascinate me is the support that the opposition Dhivehi Rayyithunge Party still holds among the people. It also fascinates me just how much hatred some people have for the MDP.

I refuse to believe that these people are all crazy. After all, some of these people are intelligent, educated and perfectly reasonable people.

So let me try and outline some categories of people who may find it ‘logical’ to support DRP and what you may feel if you belonged to any of these categories:

Direct beneficiary of DRP in power:

You are someone (or are a family member of someone) who was a direct recipient of benefits under the DRP.

This does not mean that these benefits were through corruption – but just run-of-the-mill influence or power that came to you because you believed in the vision and message of the party and supported it since its inception. And let’s face it, this is the same reason why a generation of people who are in places of influence because of the MDP now may support MDP in the future.

Democracy ain’t so hot after all:

You simply prefer the harmony that existed when democracy was not around. You are not necessarily taken in by all this talk of democracy and human rights because it has meant the disintegration of the social harmony and fabric that existed under Gayyoom. Now, every other day, there are demonstrations, strikes, and some kind of nuisance on the street.

These days people are just so angry at each other. Families, friendships, sports-clubs, marriages, relationships have all been affected quite adversely by the rise of democracy in the country.

I mean things were just so much better when people didn’t talk politics and talked about the movies or joked about their families or something equally harmless. Life was hard enough without all these politics on the street.

Worse of all, democracy has not delivered the instant benefits that it promised. You just want things back the way they were, and to go on with your life leaving the government to do what it did, even if it was doing it badly.

However, now that democracy (in all its messiness) is around, who do you blame for this? Why, the people who started doing these demonstration on the streets after all – the MDP.

After all, if it wasn’t for the MDP we wouldn’t have protests on the street. We would have a serene parliament that never debates. In fact we wouldn’t have parliament at all, especially on our TV screens. We would have songs and movies and entertainment, interrupted occasionally by a ‘riddle’ we can answer by SMS.

MDP are incompetent:

You do not believe the capabilities of the existing government are sufficient for leadership. You question the leadership ability of President Nasheed and his team. You regard them as those, who even with good intentions, simply do not have the intellectual firepower to pull all this off.

Your worst have suspicions come true because the MDP have rewarded positions of power to cronies and activists. For every qualified person in the administration, you see two hacks who had more talent at throwing stones than conducting policy. You secretly feel that the leader of our country and the majority of his cabinet should at least have a PhD, but may not quite say this out loud for the sake of being accused of elitism.

MDP are liars selling false hope for the sake of power:

You think that the MDP are peddlers of populist dreams who have promised things that they (or anyone without divine help) cannot actually deliver, simply for the sake of coming to power.

Inter-island transport network? This has never been done in the Maldives so why should it work now?

A modern real-estate market in the outer islands of the Maldives? These seem like wishful thinking to many people – even to reasonable people.

A carbon-neutral Maldives when 100% of our existing power-plants are diesel?

US$1 billion in aid in 2010? That’s seem like a little too much – especially if you fall into the category above.

The MDP leadership is dictatorial and undemocratic themselves:

Deep down you are a democrat at heart and feel strongly about the ideals of representative government. You feel that President Nasheed is pushing things in the wrong direction and acting in direct conflict with the constitution of the country.

This is a completely reasonable opinion to have, but you cannot also hold this and support DRP. That would be a tad bit hypocritical and downright silly. This however is completely justifiable if you are an ‘independent’ follower of democracy in its true forms espoused by the great political philosophers of time.

The MDP philosophy is wrong:

You oppose the center-right philosophy of the government. Rather than a free-market state that makes you responsible for your own well-being, you feel (deep-down) that the government should take care of its people – it should provide jobs in a protected public sector so that everyone has a decent guaranteed salary. You don’t care, nor do you want to care, about how the state gets its money. It should just provide us with healthcare, schooling, housing, jobs, TVs… the whole shebang if possible.

If probed a little deeper, you would say that the economic vision of the country should be that the tourism sector of the economy – just like the oil and gas sector is in Saudi Arabia – and the state should play the role in distributing the benefits of that tourism sector to the public.

Our tourism market has functioned well enough even with a few people getting very rich – and the ‘benefits’ this country has seen in the last 30 years are because of this economic model. Sure you would like change, but that change should be gradual and planned – like on a roadmap. Evolution, not revolution, is what you would have preferred.

In a sense, it is the strangely soothing tale of the state playing a truly paternalistic role in its most literal sense – acting like a benevolent father.

He/it rewards those who accept his/its wisdom and vision, while punishing those who misbehave and question its/his authority.

While this is old-fashioned, we must admit that like all fathers, there is a genuine appeal in having someone to look over us. This I believe is the reason why (in some mass pseudo-oedipal complex) the support of DRP is stronger among women of a certain generation.

My point in conducting this analysis is primarily to take the level of discussion in our political sphere to a more intelligent and hopefully beneficial level.

Firstly, I hope it gives those on the yellow-side (MDP) of the political divide something to think about on how to successfully challenge those who oppose them. No doubt, those in the first category cannot really be converted because they are the unwinnable masses, but the concerns of those in the other categories can and should be addressed.

The MDP must show these people that they are capable, that their ideology of self-help center-right compassionate economic conservatism (borrowed from their friends at the ‘New’ UK Conservative party) is a winning philosophy. They must turn their dreams into a reality.

However, for those on the blue-side (opposition and DRP side) of the divide, I hope it gives you a moment of reflection to see quite why it is that you hate the MDP so. If you fall into the first category – perhaps its time you looked into ways in which you fashion your life around having a beneficial outcome irrespective of whoever is in power.

However, for those of you who fall into the other categories – I hope it sheds light on quite why you hate the MDP so, and ask yourself how you can help your party (the DRP) to outline a better vision for our country.

The MDP claim they are center-right – so what is the philosophy of the DRP? Surely it cannot be that of a paternalistic state, which is outdated and unsustainable.

I say this because before you know it, we will once again be asked to choose our leaders. And when you do, I hope you will at least take a minute to ask yourself why it is that you are inclined to vote in a certain way. You will do this country a world of good by that small act.

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

Likes

(0)Dislikes

(0)

MDP will fight for provinces, says president

President Mohamed Nasheed has said the ruling Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) will not stand by while the opposition scuttles legislation intended to devolve decision-making powers to the people.

Addressing supporters last night at the MDP haruge (headquarters), Nasheed said the MDP did not contest the presidential election out of “greed for power” but to empower the people.

“We can only have good governance in this country when we devolve real powers of governance to the atolls,” he said. “We cannot achieve the development we want any other way. We cannot make the change we hoped for.”

MDP’s hopes for good governance rests upon its policy of creating “seven Males symbolised by the seven provinces”, he said, adding the government’s development projects were planned within the framework of the province model.

While the government began offering services available in the capital at the province offices, he continued, it has not been very efficient due to the lack of enabling legislation.

The president said he “knew very well” the efforts of a certain group to make sure that the powers of government remain concentrated in Male’.

“In my view, it would not be wise for our party to stand by while powers and benefits that are owed to the people are obstructed,” he said.

Since the legislation was formulated to hand over 40 per cent of an atoll’s resources to its people, he said, that was what the DRP was actually opposing.

Speaking at the rally, Attorney General Husnu Suood said DRP should not be allowed to adulterate or block an agenda the people had endorsed when they voted for the MDP and its manifesto.

Deadlock

Parliament remains deadlocked on the government’s bill on decentralised administration, with MDP MPs arguing the opposition dominated committee had amended the legislation so that it no longer resembles the original bill.

A total of 765 amendments have been tabled to reverse the changes made by the committee, most notably to scrap provinces.

Economies of scale would not be possible without grouping three or four atolls into provinces, MDP MPs have said, since an atoll was too small a unit to be decentralised.

The opposition Dhivehi Rayyithunge Party (DRP) maintains dividing 21 administrative areas into seven provinces was unconstitutional, as the constitution requires devolving power to the existing 21 areas.

DRP also argued that the bill would have given undue powers to provincial state ministers and the local government authority (LGA) over elected councils, including powers to dismiss and dissolve island and atoll councils.

The 11-member ad hoc committee chosen to review the legislation voted 6 to 5 to remove provinces from the bill.

Parliament sittings have been cancelled over two consecutive days after MPs clashed and the third and final reading of the bill could not be continued.

MDP MPs accused the committee of violating Majlis rules of procedure in its review and negating the purpose of the legislation, calling on the speaker to send the amended bill back to committee.

Following last night’s cancellation, MDP supporters protested outside parliament as well as the residence of Speaker Abdullah Shahid.

After originally being pushed back to 4pm, today’s sitting has been rescheduled for tomorrow morning.

Negotiations are currently ongoing between the two main parties to reach a compromise on the issue.

Likes

(0)Dislikes

(0)