Minivan News – Archive

Thousands of anti-government protesters have taken to the streets in the Eastern European country of the Ukraine, protesting over what they describe as a rigged Presidential election by the present government.

The protests – which have been ongoing for over a week but have gone largely unreported in the Maldivian state press – look set to bring the current government, which is charged with corruption, to its knees.

Top-level international mediators have arrived in the capital, Kiev, to seek a peaceful solution to the crisis. These include representatives from the European Union and Russia.

The opposition – seen by many to represent the democratic future of the Ukraine – have accused the incumbent president of engineering an electoral fraud and opposition leader Mr Yushchenko said that, as a result, the country was now “on the brink of civil conflict”.

As the crowds of protesters have swelled, there have been rumours – officially denied – that the Ukrainian army was sending tanks to the capital city, possibly to crush the protesters who have blocked key roads and public buildings and have called a national strike.

Mr Yushchenko is hoping for a ‘bloodless revolution’ of the sort that transformed many other Eastern European countries from dictatorships to democracies through massive street protests in the 1980s and 1990s.

The similarities between the current situation in the Ukraine and the present situation in the Maldives could not be more apparent.

The opposition Maldivian Democratic Party has already stated that there have been serious flaws in the nomination process for the upcoming Majlis (parliament) elections which mean the election cannot be free and fair.

Today, opposition candidate Mr Shuaib Ali reported serious flaws in the construction of the ballot boxes which could allow vote tampering.

The situation in the Ukraine is yet another example of the power mass public protest can have against dictatorial governments.

The pertinent question for the Maldives is whether in the upcoming election people will go onto the streets and protest like the people of the Ukraine have so visibly done this past week.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

LOOKING THROUGH the window of my plane from Colombo to Male a few years ago, I was enthralled by the breath-taking panorama of tropical green, and the splendour and beauty of the coral islands. The airhostess called my attention to the Immigration and Customs forms to be filled in. Perusing the forms, I came face to face with the Islamic character of the Maldives. Visitors are not allowed to bring in idols or statues of any kind, so also alcohol. The Customs officials meticulously searched my baggage. I was a little anxious that my books of prayer would be confiscated; they escaped the attention of the authorities.

Accompanied by Dr. Raghupathy, former lecturer in the Department of History, Jaffna University, I went around the national museum in Male. An old villa in the former Sultan’s palace has been converted into a museum. A second cultural shock awaited me. Unlike the national museum in New Delhi, which gives the visitor glimpses of the rich cultural heritage and composite culture of India, the museum in Male is testimony to a highly conservative society that upholds rigid Islamic ideals. The main exhibits highlight the history of the Maldives since it was Islamised in the 12th century. Objects relating to the pre-Islamic period are in a state of “benign neglect.” Most of them are kept in a closed room; a lone Buddha figure stands outside the entrance, exposed to the ravages of sun and rain.

As the President and supreme upholder of the Islamic faith, Maumoon Abdul Gayoom, who has been the Head of State since 1978, is committed to the promotion of Islam in all possible ways. Perhaps he considers such a policy to be essential for his political survival. At the same time, the realities of the Maldives, the need for modernisation, and the geographical proximity to India and Sri Lanka, dictate that the Government, in the long run, encourage a less exclusivist approach. The National Council of Islam is extremely conservative; Maldivian law is based entirely on the Koran.

When Thor Henerdhal, the well-known anthropologist, showed archaeological exhibits such as sun symbols to President Gayoom, evidence that the Maldives had an ancient civilisation comparable to Egypt, Mesopotamia and the Indus Valley, “his face lit up like a boy enraptured by Father Christmas’ gifts. He finally rose to his feet and said with pride: `We are a young Republic, yes. Now we have proof that we too have an old history, just like our neighbours in the sub-continent.'”

But Islamic scholars did not share Mr. Gayoom’s pride. When Henerdhal sought permission for further excavation, many scholars were of the opinion that the “hawittas [mounds of earth suspected to hold the ruins of Buddhist temples] had been left in peace for hundreds of years, so why take risks, why not let this continue.” Finally after great difficulty, the Islamic Council accorded permission to Henerdhal to carry out excavations on a few islands. But the startling discoveries that he made about the pre-Islamic past of the Maldives are not fully reflected in the history textbooks prescribed in schools.

Unfortunately, very little is known about the Republic of Maldives. Though an integral part of South Asia and a member of the South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation (SAARC) since the beginning, the Maldives has not attracted the attention it deserves from Indian social scientists, mediapersons and strategic specialists. Minicoy in Lakshadweep is separated from the Maldives by the Eight Degree Channel, which is 114 km across. From Kanyakumari, the Maldives is only 640 km to the southwest. The Maldives, which comprises 1,192 islets, spread across 20 atolls, has a population of just 2,85,000. Its small size, limited resources, environmental hazards and vulnerability in terms of security have dictated its developmental patterns since independence.

On the eve of independence in 1965, the Maldives was one of the poorest countries in the world. However, the last few decades have witnessed a remarkable transformation. Tourism has made tremendous strides and fisheries contribute a lot to the national exchequer. According to the Human Development Index included in the Human Development Report, 2003, the Maldives is on the top as far as South Asia is concerned. Its Human Development Index (HDI) is 86, compared to Sri Lanka’s 99, India’s 127, Bhutan’s 136, Bangladesh’s 139, Nepal’s 143 and Pakistan’s 146. Assistance from U.N. Agencies and from friendly countries like India, in addition to the skills of the expatriate workers, has contributed to this unprecedented growth.

Post-independence politics in the Maldives was dominated by two individuals who present a sharp contrast in political style and in their impact on the progress of the fledgling state. The first was Ibrahim Nasir, President from 1968 to 1978, and the second Maumoon Abdul Gayoom, who became President in 1978. Nasir was an autocrat, he rode roughshod over the Opposition, and declared a state of emergency in 1975 to ensure his political survival. In 1980, President Gayoom appointed a commission to inquire into various charges against his predecessor. Nasir and his family fled from the Maldives and settled in Singapore.

When Mr. Gayoom became President, he enjoyed popular support and international goodwill. He was considered to be a modernist Muslim. Educated in Al Azhar University, Cairo, where he took his Bachelor’s and Master’s Degrees in Islamic Studies, Mr. Gayoom was sensitive to the revivalist and modernist trends in the Islamic world. He identified himself with the aspirations of the Third World countries by joining the Non-Aligned Movement and SAARC, by supporting the demand for declaring the Indian Ocean a Zone of Peace and highlighting the security dilemma of small island-states. The abortive coup against Mr. Gayoom in November 1988 and the spontaneous support extended by India to stabilise his regime brought the Maldives into the international limelight. And as mentioned earlier, the period also witnessed rapid economic changes.

In a world of shrinking geographical boundaries and widening intellectual horizons, the Maldives remains an anachronism. All the essentials of a dynamic democracy — multi-party system, free and fair elections, independence of the judiciary, freedom of the press, active trade unions and student unions — are absent. Concentration of power in a strong executive is the hallmark of the political system. Mr. Gayoom holds out the promise that the political system will be democratised.

In June 2004, Mr. Gayoom announced an agenda for reform, which included the creation of the post of Prime Minister, the division of powers between the President and the Prime Minister, and the ushering in of a new Constitution.

But the people of the Maldives are extremely sceptical about reforms. As a result, even those who were once loyal to him have turned against him. The most well known among them is Ibrahim Hussain Zaki, former Secretary-General of SAARC. Other leaders include Gasim Ibrahim, Muhammad Munawwar, Ilyas Hussain, Ibrahim Ismail and Hussain Rasheed, all members of the Special Majlis. The imposition of emergency, continuing demonstrations against dictatorship, allegations of torture against political prisoners — all these indicate that the Maldives is entering an era of political turbulence.

Just as no man is an island, no archipelago can insulate itself from the winds of change sweeping across Asia. The logic of history and the justness of the cause will definitely bring about a change in favour of democracy. India, which has excellent relations with Maldives, cannot remain indifferent to the democratic aspirations of the people of that country. New Delhi should initiate steps to bring about political reconciliation, giving due consideration to the democratic urges of the people.

It is amazing the political leadership in New Delhi is keeping quiet when flagrant violations are taking place in the Maldives. The Doctor in Albert Camus’s book, The Plague, has the following advice: “All I maintain is that on this earth there are pestilences and there are victims, and it is up to us, so far as possible, not to join forces with pestilences.”

(The writer is Professor of Maritime Studies, Calicut University, Kerala.)

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Reports from Male’ have confirmed that the police have imprisoned two respected parliamentarians Mr.Mohamed Shihab and Mr.Hassan Afeef. The Maldivian Democratic Party strongly condemns their imprisonment without charge, their being held incommunicado and without access to legal assistance.

The MDP sees this police action as an attempt by the Government to intimidate opposition MPs, in blatant disregard to national and international concerns over irregular and illegal means and attempts by the Government to interfere and influence the outcome of forthcoming general elections.

The MDP therefore makes this urgent appeal to the concerned international community to make representations on behalf of Mr Shihab and Mr.Afeef.

In particular, the MDP requests all stakeholders in the future stability of the Maldives to pressure the Maldivian government to: ensure the election process is free and fair and in accordance with international standards – specifically, the Maldivian government must desist from harassing MDP candidates and must allow the registration of the MDP; that all who wish to stand for election are allowed to stand and campaign freely; that the electorate and the media are allowed to engage in open debate; and that state resources are not used to favor some candidates more than others.

Background information

Both Mr. Mohamed Shihab MP and Mr. Hassan Afeef MP are key leaders in the reform movement. Over many years they have vehemently argued for a pluralistic democracy in the Maldives and have worked hard to ensure parliamentary proceedings are lawful. On two occasions in the last few months they have walked out of the house in protest at the Speaker’s attempt to unfairly manipulate proceedings.

Mr. Shihab and Mr. Afeef, both have submitted their papers to contest for the forthcoming election. Mr. Afeef will be defending his traditional homeland seat of Kolumadulu Atoll, which he has held for the last 15 years. Mr. Shihab is one of the longest serving MPs. His traditional seat is South Nelandi Atoll, but further to the decisions of MDP Mr. Shihab will be contesting for a seat from Male’. Male’ is one of the strongest fortresses of the party.

These elections will be of crucial importance to the future of democratic change in the Maldives. The People’s Majlis being elected will nominate a single candidate for the 2008 Presidential election. The parliamentary nomination, which for the last 26 years has always been President Gayoom, will be put to a ‘yes-no’ referendum of the people. If the nominated candidate wins the referendum, he (women are barred from Presidential elections) will hold office until 2012. In the past, the referendum has been a foregone conclusion as President Gayoom always wins with over 98% of the vote.

The forthcoming elections for the People’s Majlis are also important with regards to constitutional reform. A further parliament has been established to make changes to the constitution. Called the People’s Special Majlis, this body is comprised of the fifty members of the People’s Majlis, the President’s cabinet and another 42 elected seats and a further 8 Presidential appointees.

Even with the inherent biases towards the President in the current system, the performance of the Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) since its establishment in late 2003, poses a serious threat to the incumbent government. In the elections for the 42 elected seats of the People’s Special Majlis, held in May 2004, pro-reform candidates (candidates are banned from running under the MDP banner) won 30 out of the 42 seats, some 70%.

If the MDP wins a similar share in the upcoming People’s Majlis election, the government would lose control over the nominations for the next President and the direction of the reform process. Thus, faced with such formidable opposition in the run-up to this election, the government continues to subvert the rule of law in an attempt to hold on to power.

In contravention of Article 27 of the constitution of the Maldives, the government refuses to grant registration for the Maldivian Democratic Party, while the government itself is acting along the lines of a well-formed single party. The government fields their own candidates acting as a party as defined by Article 27 of the constitution.

In the recent months, the government has intimidated the public by banning public gatherings, conducting sweeping mass arrests, torturing those arrested, declaring a state of emergency and nighttime curfew. The government continues to hold pro-reform MPs in detention with threats of charges with long jail sentences. The government has charged two pro-reform MPs under Article 46 of the archaic Penal Code of the Maldives.

The government is also threatening to charge other pro-reform activists and candidates for the forthcoming election and is presently intimidation and harassing the existing leadership of the reform movement in the Parliament.

The arrest of the opposition MPs and activists continues at a crucial stage of the reform programme. The MDP fielded a winning candidate for Speaker of the Special Majlis in August 2004. The reform movement has also mustered widespread grass-roots support, garnering unprecedented rallying strength, as shown by the peaceful gatherings of July and August 2004.

The MDP feels that decisions and deliberations on reform should be made with the full participation of all parties who would be affected by such reforms. The continued detention of opposition MPs and candidates and the harassment and intimidation of candidates is therefore seen as grossly unfair and as such the MDP believes that the civil rights of thousands of its supporters are being denied.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)