Tag: election

Vote counting: MDP claims 125,000 votes pledged for 2013 elections

Former President Mohamed Nasheed has claimed the Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) will receive at least 125,000 votes in the September 2013 election, an estimate based on the number of pledges received during its recent nationwide door-to-door campaign.

Nasheed’s contesting of the September elections appears increasingly likely after a criminal court case potentially disqualifying him from running became mired in allegations of politicisation – most notably from members of JSC, the same body responsible for both establishing the court hearing the case and appointing the panel of judges.

The Elections Commission (EC) will formally announce the various presidential candidates in mid-July.

Currently, contestants are likely to include Nasheed, as well as his former Vice President and incumbent Dr Mohamed Waheed in a possible coalition arrangement with other smaller parties.  Also expected to contest are Progressive Party of the Maldives (PPM) candidate Abdulla Yameen – the half-brother of the Maldives’ former autocratic leader Maumoon Abdul Gayoom – Dhivehi Rayithunge Party (DRP) Leader Ahmed Thasmeen Ali, and Jumhoree Party (JP) Leader Gasim Ibrahim, a resort tycoon, MP, media oligarch and member of the JSC.

To win government, a candidate must secure 50 percent of the vote ‘plus one’ in the first round. If this does not happen, the EC will hold a second round ‘run-off’ election several weeks after the first.

The MDP – currently the largest party in terms of membership – has declared it intends to secure a first round win.

Despite all other parties currently in government being allied against the MDP – albeit in an increasingly fractious coalition – the opposition party has dismissed the possibility of a power sharing agreement should the outcome rest on the anticipated chaotic last-minute deal-making of a second round.

“Listen to the radio on the evening of September 7, you will hear that the Maldivian Democratic Party had received 125,000 votes. Listen to the radio, listen to the radio and watch the TV,” declared the former president at a recent rally on Milandhoo in Shaviyani Atoll.

Asked to elaborate how the figure was reached, MP and former party chairperson Mariya Ahmed Didi said the party tallied the number of people who pledged to vote for Nasheed during the the MDP’s campaigning.

“We counted the amount of pledged votes so far and came to that figure. There are still some smaller islands where we have still not completed the door-to-door,” she told Minivan News.

According to the Elections Commission, 240,302 people will be eligible to vote in the presidential elections – a 15 percent increase (31,000 people) on 2008’s 209,294 eligible voters.

Bitter political and societal polarisation over February 2012’s controversial transfer of power is likely to swing fence sitters and make the results unpredictable, but the ‘high stakes’ are liable to ensure a relatively high voter turnout – as observed during the country’s first democratic multi-party election in 2008, which saw 85 percent for both rounds.

Assuming a similar voter turnout is witnessed during September’s elections as was seen in 2008, the MDP’s estimate of securing 125,000 votes is a prediction that amounts to 61 percent of the total electorate.

Outside of political division over the transfer of power on February 7, 2012, whether the MDP is able match its ambition to win the first round will hinge on the party’s appeal to young voters – particularly 31,000 18 year-olds – and whether it can match or exceed its performance in urban areas in the 2011 local council elections.

In February 2011, the then opposition DRP secured a clear seat majority across the islands and atolls in an election with a voter turnout of 70 percent and widely considered credible.

However, MDP secured an overwhelming majority of council seats in almost every major population centre, notably Male’, Addu City in the south and Kulhudhuffushi in the north – collectively accounting for approximately 50 percent of the total population.

The DRP was later split into two factions, leading former President Gayoom to eventually break away and form the PPM, which is now the second largest party in the Maldives after the MDP in terms of number of MPs.

The remnants of the DRP, together with other parties including Gasim’s JP, potentially the Maldives Development Alliance (MDA) of resort owner MP Ahmed Shiyam, and Waheed’s coalition – presently including the Dhivehi Qaumee Party (DQP) and the religious conservative Adhaalath Party (AP) – are likely to face an uphill battle in the first round.

As such, the best chance for smaller parties to leverage power may be in drawing away enough MDP votes to survive the first round and trigger power-sharing negotiations ahead of the second round.

Election challenges

Transparency Maldives has highlighted vote-buying, political polarisation, and election credibility as critical challenges for the 2013 elections, in its comprehensive pre-election assessment report released in March this year.

The NGO noted that political polarisation in the Maldives had grown in the wake of the failed all-party talks and events of February 7, 2012, leading to bitter mistrust between political factions and the pervading sense among parties that the loss of the upcoming elections “could amount to losing everything”.

“Political polarisation is characterised by mutual mistrust and radical negative categorisation of people, politicians, political parties and, sometimes, entire institutions,” Transparency noted.

“It’s characterised by the lack of self-reflective criticism, by the failures to hold one’s own self and party to account, and the inability to listen to and compromise for the callings of the other side. It’s also characterised by an apparent struggle for political power as a bitter zero-sum game.”

As a result of this polarisation, the limited space for public debate on urgently-required public policies and programs continue to be “colonised by demagogic appeals to religio-nationalist sentiments, empty motifs, and outlandish electoral promises never intended to be delivered,” Transparency stated.

“Similarly, as the polarisation is symbolised by political personalities, political debate is likely to center on personalities as opposed to issue-based discourse.”

Particular challenges around polarisation include a “lack of cooperation and dialogue among major political parties, opening up space for intolerance and violence”, “a possibility of contestation of elections results, especially if the victory is through a narrow margin”, and the risk that even if the election results are respected, “a significant segment of the polity might reject the incoming president as the representative for all the people in the true democratic spirit required in defeat.”

Transparency called in the findings for restraint among parties, appealed for policy debates, and extensive and long term observation on behalf of the international community.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Yameen elected as PPM presidential candidate

Progressive Party of Maldives (PPM) Parliamentary Group Leader Abdulla Yameen has been elected as the party’s presidential candidate to compete in the upcoming national elections.

The preliminary results of the PPM’s presidential primary reveal that Yameen won with a total of 13,096 votes, beating rival candidate Umar Naseer’s 7,450 votes – a 63 percent majority, according figures quoted by local media.

A total of 31,298 PPM members were eligible to vote in the party’s presidential primary through one of the 167 ballot boxes placed in 140 islands, Sun Online reported.

Umar Naseer accepted defeat: “If it’s a free and fair election, I will always accept the final result. I believe so far the election has been fair. As I said we will know how to proceed once we assess the complaints,” he told Haveeru.

“The party won’t be divided. I believe this will further strengthen the party as this exercise shows the strength of democracy within this party.”

Former President of the Maldives and PPM President Maumoon Abdul Gayoom congratulated his half-brother, Yameen, via Twitter following the announcement of the results.

Gayoom had urged party members to take part in Saturday’s election, despite not casting a vote himself in order to remain “neutral”.

During the voting period on Saturday (March 30), Yameen told local media that certain party members had been seen inside voting centres in Male’ using foul language in an attempt to start fights and create disorder.

Private media outlet Raajje TV captured a brief scuffle on camera between supporters of the two presidential primary candidates Umar Naseer and Abdulla Yameen.

The footage shows police being brought in to control the crowd, who are dressed in the party’s pink colour scheme.

Yameen told local media shortly after casting his vote outside the Aminiya School in Male’, that despite the minor conflicts, the party would not split.

“Overall, the voting is alright. But people from within the party have entered voting centres and have tried to start fights.

“They have raised they voices, used foul language, this should not happen in an internal election. It is very sad,” Yameen was quoted as saying in Sun Online.

On Friday (March 29), Yameen’s half brother, former President of the Maldives and PPM president Maumoon Abdul Gayoom, called for PPM members to show the world what a “responsible party” the PPM is during Saturday’s primary.

Slanderous accusations

The recent internal disorder among rival supporters follows a month of increasingly heated rhetoric between the two presidential candidates.

Earlier this month, Yameen responded to several accusations made against him, claiming the “stories” to be untrue.

“I have been accused of holding large sums of money in different accounts. I’m not responding to these allegations. But the people who work with me need public confidence.

“I want to say to you, that there are several allegations targeted at me. But those allegations are baseless and unfounded. None of those stories are true. Don’t believe them,” Yameen was quoted as saying in local media.

A spokesperson for Abdulla Yameen’s ‘Yageen’ campaign team told local media on March 23 that Umar Naseer had made slanderous and “blatantly untruthful” statements about Yameen during a recent rally.

Speaking at the aforementioned rally, Naseer claimed that Yameen’s campaign team is forced to play “80 percent in defence” in order to denounce the public’s claims against him.

“We heard our brother MP [Ahmed] Nihan speaking at Yameen’s campaign rally. All he did was try to denounce what the public says about Yameen,” Naseer said at a rally held on March 15.

“Nihan said that although people allege Yameen has ties with gangs and gang violence it is not true. He said that although people say Yameen bathes with mineral water, that isn’t true either.”

An MP is trying to frame me: Umar Naseer

Earlier in March, Naseer claimed that he had received “intel” that an attempt would be made to “assassinate” his character by planting illegal substances in his offices.

Following Naseer’s initial claims, he told supporters at a rally on March 15 that an MP involved in the illegal drug business was attempting to “frame him”.

“[The MP] tried to ruin my reputation by sending police to my business offices in the pretence of looking for illegal substances. I do not get involved in such acts.

“I will not name the MP, I do not need to name him here. He is trying to hide the relations he has with gangs and his involvement in the illegal drug business.”

On March 17, a police source told Minivan News that a bottle of alcohol had been found in a car belonging to Naseer’s wife when searched by police.

Despite Umar Naseer’s comments, former President Gayoom tweeted earlier this month that external influences were attempting to split Yameen and Umar apart.

“Some people from outside PPM are trying hard to drive a wedge between Yameen and Umar. All PPM members please be alert to this,” Gayoom tweeted.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Vote-buying, political polarisation, credibility critical challenges for 2013 elections: Transparency Maldives report

The 2013 presidential elections are set to unfold “against a context of uncertainty, crises of political legitimacy and unprecedented levels of political polarisation,” Transparency Maldives has stated, in an extensive pre-election assessment published on Thursday.

“The latter is characterised by mistrust, categorical negative framing of one another and by the lack of self-accountability of institutions, politicians and their parties for their role in the existing political crises. The electoral background is therefore discouraging,” Transparency noted.

The detailed report identifies key challenges in the lead up to the election, such as the candidacy of former President Mohamed Nasheed, lack of monitoring of campaign financing, an extensive and entrenched culture of vote buying, and a media establishment set on fueling personality politics and further polarisation.

“The upcoming Presidential Elections are currently headed to unfold against this political context of crisis of legitimation, uncertainty of democratic transition, existing polarisations and other challenges that have been aggravated by the controversial transfer of power on 7 February 2012,” Transparency states.

“Bitter zero-sum game”

Political polarisation in the Maldives has grown in the wake of the failed all-party talks and events of February 7, leading to bitter mistrust between political factions and the pervading sense among parties that the loss of the upcoming elections “could amount to losing everything”.

“Political polarisation is characterised by mutual mistrust and radical negative categorisation of people, politicians, political parties and, sometimes, entire institutions,” Transparency notes.

“It’s characterised by the lack of self-reflective criticism, by the failures to hold one’s own self and party to account, and the inability to listen to and compromise for the callings of the other side. It’s also characterised by an apparent struggle for political power as a bitter zero-sum game.”

As a result of this polarisation, the limited space for public debate on urgently-required public policies and programs continue to be “colonised by demagogic appeals to religio-nationalist sentiments, empty motifs, and outlandish electoral promises never intended to be delivered,” Transparency stated.

“Similarly, as the polarisation is symbolised by political personalities, political debate is likely to center on personalities as opposed to issue-based discourse.”

Particular challenges around polarisation include a “lack of cooperation and dialogue among major political parties, opening up space for intolerance and violence”, “a possibility of contestation of elections results, especially if the victory is through a narrow margin”, and the risk that even if the election results are respected, “a significant segment of the polity might reject the incoming president as the representative for all the people in the true democratic spirit required in defeat.”

Transparency called for restraint among parties, appealed for policy debates, and extensive and long term observation on behalf of the international community.

Nasheed’s candidacy

Transparency stated that most of the people and institutions interviewed for the report, “irrespective of their political affiliations”, saw the potential disqualification of Nasheed from the presidential race through the ongoing court proceedings as “a major challenge” for the elections.

“None of the major political actors Transparency Maldives met was eager for disqualification of President Nasheed, although some qualified their position saying that rule of law must apply equally for all and he must face justice.

“A few major stakeholders believed it was politically motivated. A politician of a major political party saw any election victory for them without President Nasheed as a rival candidate as just a “hollow victory”.”

Should Nasheed be prevented from contesting on behalf of the Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP), Transparency predicted political violence in the run up to the elections marring the electoral environment, boycott of the elections by the MDP, outright rejection of elections results and the incoming president by the MDP, and widespread disruptions to the elections themselves: “Transparency Maldives heard suggestions it would be altogether impossible to hold elections in some parts of the country.”

In light of controversy surrounding the judicial legitimacy of the proceedings against Nasheed, Transparency backed international calls for an inclusive election.

“As an elections-observing NGO, Transparency Maldives is of the view that if any potential presidential candidate is prevented from the Presidential Elections through a controversial process, the credibility and democratic representativeness of the elections will be called into question.

“Several international bodies, including most recently the UN Special Rapporteur on Independence of Judges and Lawyers, have criticised the state of the judiciary. There are deep disagreements as to the legitimacy of the Hulhumale’ Magistrate Court and the special bench of judges appointed to oversee President Nasheed’s trial. Some of the members of the Judicial Service Commission have openly questioned the legality of appointing a special bench. All these reasons give room to doubt the judicial processes,” Transparency stated.

“Crucially, even if elections can be held [without Nasheed], the incoming president will face immense legitimacy challenges, as is the case with the current government. Democracy consolidation is impossible under a context where legitimacy [of the government] is contested by a substantial segment of the population. Thus, key to successfully addressing the ongoing legitimation crisis is holding elections in which candidates of all major political parties are free to contest,” Transparency added, calling for the government, the elections commission, prosecutor general, judicial services commission, judiciary and human rights commission to ensure no presidential candidate is prevented from contesting.

Buy-election fears

Transparency identified vote buying as key issue in the lead up to the election.

“The issues of vote buying and influencing voters through patronage seem to have had a long history in the country,” the report notes.

Transparency enlisted focus groups to study the issue on Fuvahmulah, Kaashidhoo, and Hulhudhuffaar to try and identify why the practice was so accepted.

“A crisis of confidence in candidates’ sincerity to deliver on their electoral promises could be one of the main reasons why many people take offers. Almost all the participants in the discussions thought the candidates would not bother about them or their community post-elections, or after winning the elections. ‘They would not even answer their phones’ was a common retort,” Transparency noted.

“There are particularly vulnerable groups of people who are targets of vote buying. Youth groups who are victims of drug addiction, for example, could be offered drugs, money to buy drugs, or drugs at discounted rates, in exchange of their votes. Similarly, the less disadvantaged people, people in need of medical treatment, or the more elderly, seem to be particularly vulnerable to vote buying.

A weak elections complaints system and loopholes in the electoral legal framework “mean there is no effective deterrence against vote buying. Criminalisation of taking bribery in exchange of votes in the Penal Code also hinders reporting.”

“Finally, civil society or the EC has so far failed to even successfully thematise and problematise vote buying in the public sphere, and therefore there is a need for greater awareness on the issue among the people.”

Transparency studied the Kaashidhoo by-election, during which “vote buying reached new highs”.

“We were told by campaign agents involved in the respective campaigns that the two main candidates spent more than MVR7 million (US$454,000) an amount double the total spending limit under the law for Kaashidhoo constituency of 2231 voters.”

“In contrast, the much less populated Hulhudhufaar, vote buying took place more sparingly and discreetly. In Fuvahmulah, we were told, one candidate did not even have to campaign, but visited the island a week or so before the election and just distributed cash to his constituency.”

At the same time, most participants of the focus groups – particularly women – said that people did not necessarily vote for the candidates from whom they took money.

“There are two possible reasons why people might not vote for the candidates even if they receive offers from them: there is a general confidence in the secrecy of vote since 2008 Presidential Elections, and there is little or no fear of post-election reprisals from candidates,” Transparency stated.

“Some of the few people, who thought people vote as they take offers, ironically cited religious reasons in keeping a promise. However, some participants reported that candidates/agents influence people to show proof of their vote. Thus, some smuggle mobile phones with cameras into voting booths to take photos of their voted ballot papers or some even showed their ballot papers to representatives of candidates at the polling stations.”

Transparency suggested decriminalisation of acceptance of offers to increase people’s willingness to come forward and report the practice, while calling on the elections commission and other authorities to create an interagency task force to tackle the problem and prosecute those making offers. It also called for greater voter education, particularly surrounding vote buying and the practice of assisted voting.

Elections commission

The Transparency report details some concerns about the capacity of the elections commission, in particular the relationship between the commission members and the technical staff.

At the same time, “No major political party or key stakeholder questioned the independence or impartiality of the EC as an institution. No such allegation was also made against any Commission members with regard to any election.”

“A few interlocutors, however, questioned the impartiality of some of the members of the EC and some staff, and cited instances. Several interlocutors also expressed concern there existed such allegations, especially made by the staff, against some members.”

“There could be challenges to the EC to act impartially and independently in a highly polarised political environment, as members are likely subjected to external pressures. This could be aggravated by the fact that a simple majority of those present and voting in a parliamentary sitting could remove a member of the EC. While some interlocutors believed there was a possibility of removal of some members in the run up to the elections, the fact that no political party has a majority in the People’s Majlis means that removal requires cross-party cooperation, which might not be forthcoming.”

Given the charged nature of the election, training and recruitment of non-partisan polling staff was emerging as a challenge, Transparency noted.

“Another common concern by several of the interlocutors we met was that some polling workers acted in partisan manner. Transparency Maldives’ own observation, however, found polling workers were largely unbiased in the last Local Council, Parliamentary and the Presidential Elections.

“Nonetheless, with the current levels of political polarisation and shortcomings of the legal framework that allows politicisation of civil servants, the EC will find it extremely challenging to recruit nonpartisan polling staff for the upcoming elections,” Transparency stated.

Despite the many challenges outlined in the report, Transparency noted that the success and credibility of past elections – including by-elections held subsequent to the events of February 7, 2012 – gave cause for hope.

“Maldivians have in the past shown they do respect the outcomes of free, fair and inclusive elections. The upcoming elections therefore give hope. Yet to convert hope into reality requires realisation of the tri-values of freedom, fairness, and inclusiveness for the upcoming elections.

“Assuring freedom for the upcoming elections requires sustaining an electoral environment for voters to freely choose a president without fear, intimidation, and undue influence, but through the opportunities to fully exercise freedom of expression, association and assembly.

“Fairness at a minimum requires a level playing field. Thus, the existing culture of misuse of public resources by the incumbency to their electoral advantage must stop.

“Inclusiveness requires ensuring an electoral context for all to participate in elections, and ensuring that no potential presidential candidate is prevented from contesting the Presidential Elections through any questionable processes.”

Read the 2013 pre-elections assessment

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Defamatory accusations are baseless and untrue: PPM MP Yameen

Progressive Party of Maldives (PPM) presidential primary candidate Abdulla Yameen has claimed that recent defamatory allegations made against him are baseless and untrue.

Speaking at a rally in Addu City on Thursday (March 21), Yameen revealed that he had been accused of several issues, including holding large sums of money in foreign banks, local media reported.

Responding to the accusations, Yameen stated that “none of those stories are true”, asking people not to believe them.

“I have been accused of holding large sums of money in different accounts. I’m not responding to these allegations. But the people who work with me need public confidence.

“I want to say to you, that there are several allegations targeted at me. But those allegations are baseless and unfounded. None of those stories are true. Don’t believe them,” SunOnline quoted Yameen as saying.

Yameen had stated he did not want to comment further on the matter, and that he did not wish to respond to the claims against him.

Yameen, who is the half brother of former autocratic ruler Maumoon Abdul Gayoom, claimed that if the PPM wins the presidential election this year, the Maldives would experience “prosperity similar to, or even better than, the past 30 years.”

In reference to a number of young individuals who reportedly praised Yameen during the rally, the PPM presidential primary candidate said while he cannot accept constant praise, continuous criticism could also become an issue.

“At rallies like this I often hear about my services. I feel disinclined to sit and listen when people talk about my services. But this is a practice introduced by young people.

“But before they take it too far, I want to say, I may not be able to accept continuous praise; but at the same time, continuous criticism could also lead to displeasure,” Yameen was quoted as saying.

Both Abdulla Yameen and Umar Naseer are currently campaigning to win the PPM’s presidential candidate slot for the upcoming presidential elections, to be held in September this year.

Yameen forced to play 80 percent in defence: Umar Naseer

Last week, a spokesperson for Abdulla Yameen’s ‘Yageen’ campaign team told local media on Saturday that Umar Naseer had made slanderous and “blatantly untruthful” statements about Yameen during a recent rally.

Speaking at the aforementioned rally, Naseer claimed that Yameen’s campaign team is forced to play “80 percent in defence” in order to denounce the public’s claims against him.

“We heard our brother MP [Ahmed] Nihan speaking at Yameen’s campaign rally. All he did was try to denounce what the public says about Yameen,” Naseer said at a rally held on March 15.

“Nihan said that although people allege Yameen has ties with gangs and gang violence it is not true. He said that although people say Yameen bathes with mineral water, that isn’t true either.”

Earlier this month, Naseer claimed that he had received “intel” that an attempt would be made to “assassinate” his character by planting illegal substances in his offices.

Following Naseer’s initial claims, he told supporters at a rally on March 15 that an MP involved in the illegal drug business was attempting to “frame him”.

“[The MP] tried to ruin my reputation by sending police to my business offices in the pretence of looking for illegal substances. I do not get involved in such acts.

“I will not name the MP, I do not need to name him here. He is trying to hide the relations he has with gangs and his involvement in the illegal drug business.”

On March 17, a police source told Minivan News that a bottle of alcohol had been found in a car belonging to Naseer’s wife when searched by police.

“Last night the driver of the car had parked after there had been some sort of accident caused by someone on the back seat.

“At that time, the driver found a bottle of alcohol within the car and reported it to the police. We took the driver, questioned him and released him,” the source claimed.

Speaking in regard to the alcohol allegedly found in the car, Police Spokesperson Chief Inspector Hassan Haneef confirmed that a bottle had been found and the case was still under investigation.

“We received a report from a driver of a vehicle stating that there was a bottle of alcohol in the car. Police went to the car, searched it and took the vehicle,” Haneef said.

Despite Umar Naseer’s comments, former President Gayoom tweeted earlier this month that external influences were attempting to split both Yameena and Umar apart.

“Some people from outside PPM are trying hard to drive a wedge between Yameen and Umar. All PPM members please be alert to this,” Gayoom tweeted.

The PPM presidential primary election is scheduled for March 30.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Transparency Maldives announces extensive election monitoring program

Transparency Maldives has said it will conduct an extensive program of election monitoring during the 2013-14 elections in a bid to ensure the polls are fair and credible.

The Elections Commission (EC) announced this week that presidential elections would be held on September 7, with any run-off election to be held later the same month if required.

Transparency conducted domestic election monitoring during the 2008-2011 cycle of elections, including the country’s first multi-party presidential, parliamentary and local council elections. The results of these elections were widely accepted both locally and internationally – a notable outcome given the high temperature of the country’s politics.

“However, the current political polarisation and the tense, sometimes violent, political environment have strained and continue to further threaten the democratic gains of the previous election processes,” Transparency Maldives warned.

“The next round of elections is currently headed to unfold against this polarised background that appears to deteriorate in terms of political and economic problems,” it added.

In addition to nationwide election monitoring, Transparency Maldives will deploy observers to monitor the entire campaign period, as well as conduct a pre-election technical assessment that includes a focus on voter education.

“Educating voters is a crucial component of a credible election. Voter education is important to instil the values of civic responsibilities and prevent electoral violations such as vote buying and patronage, and change the attitudes of the general public to encourage wider public participation in increasing the integrity of the electoral system,” Transparency said.

The organisation will also run an online complaints mechanism, and perform media monitoring of the country’s heavily polarised fourth pillar.

Behind the “buy-elections”

Election results in the Maldives since 2008 have been widely declared credible by local and international observers, in large part due to a crackdown on practices such as photographing ballots with camera phones, and ‘assisting’ elderly or infirm relatives to vote. However, undemocratic activities in the lead up to polling – such as vote buying, patronage and intimidation – are rampant.

Minivan News observed many such activities first-hand during the Kaashidoo by-elections in April 2012.

“The people of this island will vote for money, they don’t have any principles,” confided a 21 year-old islander at the time. “The problem is that people want to force you to vote for who they support. Everyone should have the right to vote for whoever they want. Arguments within families have gone to the point that people are losing face.”

All sides were guilty of handing out cash, he said, in the guise of extending assistance for medical care: “Some people even use the money for drugs.”

In another instance, Minivan News observed a group of youths openly warning an elderly man in a cafe that they would cut of his cigarette supply unless he voted as they wished.

Other practices are more subtle – youth clubs or island NGOs may receive sizeable donations of cash or equipment in exchange for leaders influencing their members to vote in a certain manner.

During voting day on Kaashidoo, Minivan News observed that both candidates had set up exit poll booths under wide parasols, and were crossing off people who had voted.

Many islanders Minivan News spoke to at the time were open about the assistance they had received, justifying it on the grounds that the campaign period was the only time they would ever see their elected representative.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Comment: Maldivian faith to Maldivians

This article first appeared on DhivehiSitee. Republished with permission.

Political prostitutes who pose as religious scholars and sell their Islamic learning to the highest bidder have become some of the biggest contributors to the current socio-political and economic turmoil in the Maldives.

Chief among them is Sheikh Imran Abdulla, current president of Adhaalath Party – an organisation which uses the religion of Islam as its chief recruitment and fundraising tool, and proudly exploits people’s faith for political purposes.

Sheikh Imran Abdulla was one of the chief choreographers of the Islamists’ role in the downfall of the Maldivian democracy. On 2 February 2012, he issued an ultimatum to the then President Mohamed Nasheed: resign within five days or be forced out of office.

Nasheed was forced to resign on 7 February.

Yesterday, Sheikh Imran, now a chief mover and shaker in the current ‘Coalition Government’ issued another ultimatum. This time to the government he helped put in place: get out of the 25-year contract with India’s GMR Group for upgrading and running the Ibrahim Nasir International Airport within six days (by 15 November), or else.

He issued the ultimatum at a public rally widely believed to be funded by rich tourism tycoons, currently openly fighting over the country’s airports, and who have vested interests in getting GMR out.

The rally was a colourful affair, aimed chiefly at rousing the masses into a fervour by making the GMR issue into a religious one. The aim, it appears, is to incite enough public discontent to pressure the government into reneging on its agreement with GMR.

Ahead of the rally, held at the Artificial Beach in Male’, leaflets were distributed all over the island, encouraging people to attend the rally in the name of Islam, to save the Maldivian airport from foreign ‘economic invaders’ of ‘other religions’.

Songs were played on loudspeakers attached to pick-up trucks that went round and round the island, stopping at mosques after Friday prayers for maximum effect.

One of the songs has the title—Maldivians’ Prayer: Maldivian airport to Maldivians. Another is called simply Maldivian Airport to Maldivians. The latter raises the volume on nationalism and the former suggests ending the agreement with GMR is a religious duty of Maldivians.

Here’s some of the lyrics from Maldivians’ Prayer:

You get the picture.

The rally was not as big as the Mother of All Rallies, or the so-called Mahaasinthaa, held on 23 December 2011 to ‘Defend Islam’ by removing President Nasheed from office and endorsing his then Vice President Dr Waheed as his replacement.

But there was still a sizeable crowd of hundreds gathered around the nationalistic/religious banners.

Sheikh Imran told them it was their religious duty to deliver the airport from India’s GMR. Men and women (strange this, given that Imran has repeatedly stated that women should stay home and breed instead of joining political rallies) stayed listening to Sheikh Imran and his fellow Islam-sellers long after midnight and in the pouring rain.

Before ending the rally for the night, another ‘scholar’ led a prayer calling on Allah to bring his wrath upon GMR and cause it great destruction.

Such rhetoric not only fools a lot of people into accepting this economic/political issue as a religious matter, it also helps increase the intolerance and xenophobia which have become defining characteristics of the Maldivian society today, thanks mainly to the religion-political-tourism industry complex that now reigns supreme over Maldivian affairs.

Moreover, as former Maldivian High Commissioner to the United Kingdom Farah Faizal quickly highlighted, turning the issue into a religious one also has the potential to make life very difficult for the tens of thousands of Maldivian immigrants in India by creating tensions between them and the largely Hindu majority Indian population.

The rising radicalisation of Maldivians has been a cause for concern in India for several years, and it is well-known that a Maldivian was involved in the Mumbai attacks of 2008, as is the fact that the terrorist organisation Lashkar e Taiba has beenoperating and recruiting in the Maldives.

Young disaffected Maldivians are many, and most are highly vulnerable to ideological indoctrination by individuals who propagate extremist ideologies.

Sadly, many do not see beyond ‘The Scholar’ façade behind which these individuals operate. Tens of thousands remain incapable of looking further than the carefully cultivated beards, or the Pashtun garb—no more Islamic or Maldivian than GMR itself.

Hundreds everyday accept these individuals as devout religious scholars and remain blind to how they turn Islamic teachings into a commodity that can be bought and sold to equally unscrupulous businessmen/politicians.

It is these individuals, worked into a frenzy by individuals like Sheikh Imran, who have travelled abroad to kill themselves and others in the name of Islam.

Several government officials were at yesterday’s rally, including the President’s Spokesperson Abbas Adil Riza. Riza loudly accused Indian High Commissioner to the Maldives D.M. Mullay—a key figure behind India’s quick acceptance of Dr Waheed’s government as legitimate—of taking bribes to ensure GMR was awarded the Maldives airport contract.

Here’s Dr Waheed’s spokesperson Abbas Riza at the rally:

But, as is now coming to be expected, the government has stayed wholly silent on the rampant exploitation of religion for political purposes, further reinforcing the perception that it is complicit in this phenomenon and condone it as a valid political strategy.

It is still silent, for instance, on the Salafists’ call last week to have Maldivian girls declared women at puberty. A children’s Afternoon with Ali Rameez remains scheduled to go ahead on 15 November as planned, despite the fact that Ali Rameez is the man leading the call to end girl-childhood at puberty.

And, as we shall see on 15 November (also the date of the GMR ultimatum), there will be many parents who would take their children to this pop-singer turned ultra-religious conservative without pausing to think about what they are doing.

These people will represent the thousands of Maldivians who have already bought into the dogma, among others, that it is their religious duty to have their girl-children married off at puberty to men old enough to be their grandfathers.

The official silence over ‘religious scholars’ and their exploitation of Islam to suit various socio-political and economic purposes must end. Such voices must be strongly countered and condemned.

The long term consequences of their actions will not be seen only in the political economy, but in the Maldivian identity itself which has already changed so drastically in the last decade as to be unrecognisable.

From a laid-back island community of moderate and tolerant Muslims whose relationship with God was their personal affair, Maldives has become a highly radical and tense society in which a large percentage of the population is bigoted, intolerant and xenophobic.

Among them will be the few who will join the violent militants.

What is of equally great concern are the tens of thousands of Maldivians who fail to see these political prostitutes for what they are, and willingly give up their own human rights and dignity and deny others theirs in the name of Islam.

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)

Comment: Election-phobic politicians cowering behind judiciary

“So you are proposing to incarcerate Mr Nasheed, are you?” a reporter recently asked a leader in the so-called Maldives Unity Coalition.

“Yes, we are. We will keep him in prison for a long time,” he replied.

The reporter winces.

“I see,” he says, just managing to look respectful. “So, you won’t have him to compete with your candidate to win elections?”

Ingenious, these people must think themselves.

“It’s one way to force you to the top, of course. But I shouldn’t call it civilised, or democratic,” he blurts out. “Justice has to be enforced, so, we don’t look at it like that,” the politician says. “Posterity will.”

The defeat of 2008 common amongst them, political losers of that election have tripped up and toppled the elected government in just three years.

Getting the peculiar lexicon right – the so called “harmonious diplomatic narrative” about the police mutiny amidst-coup and the actions of politicians leading up to the regime-change – took the Commission of National Inquiry (CoNI) a while, and eventually they had to ‘selvam’ the whole thing.

The so-called Unity Coalition that toppled the elected government comprises leaders of parties that have ostensibly not conducted organisational or internal elections in a transparent or an all-inclusive manner since inception. Despite having to resort to stark and obvious giveaways of election-phobia, they are looking to hunker down and stay on in power, obviously for as long as possible.

Getting on about it through the judiciary

Almost all senior MDP members are political victims of the previous regime, many having undergone torture and time in their prisons. However the new democratic regime, seeming to steer clear of paving the way and facilitating transitional justice, probably led opponents to cut up rough and go on talking openly about putting Mr Nasheed away in prison again.

Maldivians know that sitting presently in the Judicial Service Commission (JSC), the oversight body for the judiciary, are political opponents of President Nasheed – opponents in whose personal and political interest it is to incarcerate and disqualify their main challenger prior to elections. They have been publicly talking about it for months.

While members of the DRP, PPM and others in that bandwagon actively work to regularise discrepancies in the house, political leaders involved in regime-change such as MP Gasim Ibrahim and Majlis Speaker Abdulla Shahid continue to be influential members of the Judicial Service Commission.

Meanwhile, breaches of the Constitution by the Judicial Service Commission, such as the nullification of Article 285 – which stipulates qualification criteria for judges – by declaring it as a “symbolic article”; the subsequent reappointment of the pre-2008 Constitution judges without required checks; the prevention of meaningful changes and the establishment up of an independent judiciary are all pending in parliament without further inquiry.

The legitimacy of Chief Judge of the Criminal Court Abdulla Mohamed’s re-appointment as a judge can only be determined by an inquiry into the Judicial Service Commission and its actions over Article 285. All attempts to address issues of the Judicial Service Commission – especially with regard to its contravening Article 285 and pending complaints against Abdullah Mohamed – have been blocked by the opposition MPs of the DRP, PPM, and the DQP, by systematically disrupting every sitting in which these matters are raised. These MPs have gone so far as to publicly state that they will stonewall and prevaricate all pending issues concerning Article 285.

Ethical misconduct

While Article 285 embodies qualifications for judges, the case ofAbdulla Mohamed, glorified by the opposition as ‘Abdulla Gazi’, the hero of regime-change and victim of Nasheed’s government, have been widely published.  In 2005, then Attorney General Dr Hassan Saeed first forwarded to the President’s Office concerns about the conduct of Abdulla Mohamed after he allegedly requested an underage victim of sexual abuse to reenact her abuse in open Court.

In 2009, the new democratic government forwarded those documents to the Judicial Service Commission (JSC), which was requested to launch an investigation into the outstanding complaints as well as the alleged obstruction of “high-profile corruption investigations”.

The JSC decided not to proceed with the investigation on July 30, 2009. However in November that year, the JSC completed an investigation into a complaint of ethical misconduct against the judge.

The case was presented to the JSC in January 2010 by former President’s member of the JSC, Aishath Velezinee, after Abdulla Mohamed appeared on private network DhiTV and expressed “biased political views”.

Velezinee observed at the time that it was the first time the JSC had ever completed an investigation into a judge’s misconduct.

“There are many allegations against Abdulla Mohamed, but one is enough,” she said at the time. “If the JSC decides, all investigation reports, documents and oral statements will be submitted to parliament, which can then decide to remove him with a simple two-thirds majority”, she said.

Weeks later, Ibrahim Shahum Adam of Galolhu Cozy, listed by police as one of the nine most dangerous criminals in Maldives, and in prison for his alleged involvement in a stabbing near Maafannu “Maziya Grounds” during July, 2010 that killed 17-year-old Mohamed Hussein of Maafannu Beauty Flower,  was abruptly released by ‘Abdulla Gazi’ saying he wanted to hold the Health Minister accountable, as police had claimed a difficulty in obtaining a health certificate.

Shahum had also earlier attacked a fellow student attending an Imam course inside a teashop, and the victim, Ahmed Naeem of Carnationmaage, Alif Alif atoll Thoddu, had testified in court .

Days after Shahum was released by Abdullah “Gazi”, he was arrested again by police for the alleged  stabbing murder of 21-year-old Ahusan Basheer of Varudheege, Hithadhoo, Addu City, while the young man was walking along a street in Male’.

In October 2011, the ruling Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) appealed for assistance from the international community over the “increasingly blatant collusion between politicians loyal to the former autocratic President, Maumoon Abdul Gayoom, and senior members of the judiciary – most of whom were appointed by Gayoom during his 30 years of power.”

On October 26, Judge Abdulla ruled that the arrest of Gassan Maumoon – son of former President Maumoon Abdul Gayoom – on suspicion of hurling a wooden block at protesters leading to a participant being disabled for life, was unlawful. This established a precedent that police could not arrest suspects without an arrest warrant “unless the arresting officer observes the offence being committed”.

The contentious ruling led police to release 11 suspects while the Prosecutor General’s Office (PGO) sought legal clarification on criminal justice procedures.

JSC a stakeholder in trial

It is laughable that the Judicial Service Commission is itself a stakeholder in the ongoing case against President Nasheed, as it is the very failure of that Commission to uphold the rule of law and fulfill its Constitutional mandate that underlies the creation of “Judge” Abdulla Mohamed, the subject of the trial.

Thus it is difficult to ‘selvam’ the fact that it is contradictory to the principle of natural justice for the Judicial Service Commission to decide the bench or in any way interfere and/or influence the trial.

The Judicial Service Commission intervened in Nasheed’s trial with blatant impunity, by abusing its powers to appoint judges to courts and deciding the bench for the trial itself. The Judicial Service Commission temporarily transferred three magistrates from other magistrate courts specifically to create the three member panel that is presiding over President Nasheed’s trial.

Some months earlier, the Anti Corruption Commission was widely quoted in the press on the appointment of the wife of a JSC member, Magistrate Shiyama, to the so-called Hulhumale’ Court, and the allegations continue that the Hulhumale’ Court is kept by the Judicial Service Commission in violation of the Judicature Act as a reward to Shiyama who, with a diploma in legal studies, does not qualify for appointment as a magistrate to a superior court.

Meanwhile, many people who attended the enforced first hearing of this so called trial believe that the Prosecutor General filed the case against President Nasheed invoking Article 81 of the Penal Code in open contravention of Article 17 of the Maldives Constitution under which every citizen is entitled to rights and freedoms without any discrimination, regardless of their political beliefs.

There has been no previous instance of a magistrates’ panel being convened to prosecute any case or individual charged under Article 81 of the Penal Code. Thus, it is common belief that appointing a magistrates’ panel to prosecute this case, by appointing magistrates from different jurisdictions including one who is currently under investigation by the Judicial Services Commission, is a direct violation of Article 17 of the Maldives Constitution.

Calls for Judicial reform get louder

Calls for judicial reform in Maldives are getting broader acceptance with talk rife these days in tea shops, coffee houses and Usfasgandu, of widespread corruption and corruptibility among judges.

Meanwhile some lawyers are publicly detailing tactics used by various judges to deny litigants due process.  Alleged such tactics include intimidation, muzzling, ignoring court rules, creating new rules, fabrication of facts, testifying for a party, issuance of absurd legal opinions, torturing the law as well as other creative means that have boggled the minds of numerous laypeople, lawyers and even judges.

These discussions are removing the halo of honorability that surrounds many “respected” judges and demonstrating how, for many judges, the canons of judicial conduct and Article 285 were enacted only for public consumption. It also demonstrates how certain judges, when challenged to explain their decision or stance, act no different than the same common criminals they were appointed to judge.

Judges accused of being corrupt are acting with the knowledge that their decisions will most likely be affirmed by fellow judges on appeal, pursuant to a tacit “fraternity” code. In other words, trial court judges openly utter absurdities in their opinions with the knowledge that fellow judges at the appellate court are not too keen on reversals.

They are also accused of acting with the knowledge that any commission charged with investigating judicial misconduct at the state level can at present ‘selvam’ such reports and dismiss any complaints against fellow judges.

Can they ‘selvam’ the vote?

Out in Singapore and Bangalore, schemes are going on at full blast to ‘selvam’ a submission in procuring Dr Duhbuhlyoo a good international job, after his much lauded and ruthless puppet role here. After all, the deputy, Duhbuhlyoo D, other friends among glorified foreign touts, and merchants of blood-oranges, all parodying here in the guise of diplomats and others flaunting professional respectability, are thinking of questionable money transactions in the PR, hospitality, border control and other deals pegged to Maldives.

Here in the Maldives, those who have faith in human ingenuity and meaningful change for the good, those who consider it necessary every once in a while for the right-thinking element of the community to slip it across certain of the baser sort – are at it regular like these days. They exude the confidence that all this will begin to come right again soon, through ballots proving the best weapon, against both a shady judiciary and those cowering behind it.

Mohamed Zuhair was former President Mohamed Nasheed’s Press Secretary from November 2008 to February 2012.

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)

Go through process, but do not allow trial to disenfranchise former president: McKinnon

While the Maldives’ judiciary is “not the strongest of the democratic institutions in the Maldives”, the international spotlight would encourage a fair trial of former President Mohamed Nasheed, Sir Don McKinnon has told ABC Radio Australia.

The Commonwealth Secretary-General’s Special Envoy for the Maldives told the channel that the international community was watching the matter “very closely”.

Nasheed was arrested by the police on Monday acting on a warrant from the Hulhumale’ Magistrate Court, where the Prosecutor General has filed charges concerning the former president’s detention of Chief Judge of the Criminal Court, Abdulla Mohamed, while in office.

Nasheed has maintained that the detention was justified on grounds of national security following the failure of other institutions to hold the judge accountable, and alleged that the charges against him are a politically-motivated attempt to prevent him from contesting the 2013 elections.

“All the major players that have been talking to the Maldives recently are also saying go through your processes, but do not allow this to disenfranchise the former president,” McKinnon told ABC Radio.

Asked whether he shared Nasheed’s concerns that he would not be tried fairly, “I think on this particular case [the judiciary] know very well that there’s more than just a few Maldivian people watching this trial.”

“The international players are watching and I believe that the Maldivian judiciary will be very careful,” McKinnon said.

“It certainly can be fair and it should be fair. These people know exactly what is expected of a judiciary, but there is a high level of political sensitivity in that country, there’s a tense atmosphere which does get more difficult from time to time. But there is still the possibility of having a fair trial, yes,” he said.

Asked about the country’s future, McKinnon suggested that “we who live in Western countries expect things to happen very fast. I began my dealings with the Maldives probably about seven years ago, encouraging them to have a new constitution, have free and fair elections, which they did. And that was the first time they’d really had free and fair elections in 2008.

“Now on that basis Maldives democracy is really only four years old, so there’s still a lot of elbowing people around, much of the political structure within the Maldives is based on personalities, there’s not great ideological divides, there are six or seven different parties in and out of the margins right now. There are many things that it is grappling with that it’s never had to grapple with before, and the important thing is the international community give them support to allow this very fledgling democracy to mature.”

Failure to defend democracy

Former President Nasheed has meanwhile told the UK’s Guardian newspaper that the international community had failed to defend democracy in the Maldives, saying that it was “difficult for me to believe that democracy is sacred for the international community”.

“The people of the Maldives have lost faith with the international community … which has taken a very narrow view,” Nasheed told the paper.

“It is very certain that they can’t win [the election] with me [standing] as a candidate so they are trying all sorts of ways to stop me … It is really quite chilling,” he said, noting that his party had decided to boycott the election if he was excluded from running.

“No travel ban”

The government has meanwhile issued a statement noting concerns raised by the UK, US and European Union regarding the arrest of Nasheed.

Minister of State for Foreign Affairs Dunya Maumoon – daughter of Nasheed’s predecessor Maumoon Abdul Gayoom – said the government was “fully committed to strengthening democracy and rule of law in the Maldives”.

“[Nasheed was released from police custody after the first hearing. He was taken into custody following a court order issued by the Hulhumale’ Magistrate Court, after he ignored court summons and refused to appear for the first hearing of the case which had been originally scheduled for 1 October 2012 and rescheduled for 7 October 2012,” she said.

“Contrary to claims by the Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP), and also by Amnesty International, police did not use excessive force during the arrest of the former President Nasheed. His safety and security had been the priority and no one was harmed or pepper sprayed during the operation,” the statement read.

“The Police Integrity Commission (PIC) and the Human Rights Commission of Maldives (HRCM) had been invited to observe the operation. While in custody, former President Nasheed was afforded the right to an attorney and meet with his family members. There is no travel ban on him and he is currently travelling out to some of the atolls.”

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

JP will split MDP support in election, says PPM

Progressive Party of Maldives (PPM) Interim Vice President Umar Naseer has welcomed the growth of the Jumhoree Party (JP), stating his belief that the party is likely to split the Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) vote in future elections.

His comments were said to have been in response to rumours that PPM MPs were considering defecting to the JP.

“Lately rumors have been circulating that some members of PPM’s parliamentary group are planning to switch parties. Many have called me to clarify about the matter. I would like to assure all members of the party that no member of our parliamentary group plan to crossover to another political party, and will never do,” Haveeru reported Naseer as saying.

“JP especially is adding many new members, which is not something of concern to PPM. It’s not like they are removing parts of PPM’s roof to complete theirs – rather, they are removing parts of MDP’s roof to complete their roof,” Naseer was reported to have said.

Feydhoo constituency MP Alhan Fahmy who has recently moved from the MDP to the JP said that he did not wish to respond to these comments. When switching parties, the former Vice President of the MDP was accompanied by the former MDP President, Dr Ibrahim Didi, and former MDP Secretary General Hassan Shah.

The JP – led by prominent Maldivian businessman and MP Ibrahim Gasim – currently has six members in the People’s Majlis, whilst the PPM – led by former President Maumoon Abdul Gayoom – has 18 seats in the house.

The most recent statistics from the Elections Commission (EC) show that the JP has lost six members in the past three weeks, whilst the PPM has gained 322, bringing the official membership figures to 5,914 and 16,565 respectively.

The EC figures also show that the JP has 2,175 forms waiting to be processed. The PPM is shown to have 1,211.

The JP Registrar General Mohamed ‘Inthi’ Imthiyaz told Haveeru earlier this month that the main obstacle increasing the party membership was the speed at which the forms could be processed.

Vice President of the EC Ahmed Fayaz said that the processing of the forms may take a few weeks due to the limited resources available to the commission.

Forms must be checked to ensure the identity of the party member before they can be officially affiliated to one particular party but said it was not common for forms to be rejected.

Should the unprocessed forms be assumed as valid, the membership of the top four parties in terms of popularity would be follows:

  • Maldivian Democratic Party – 48,843 – 29 seats in the Majlis
  • Dhivehi Rayithunge Party (DRP) – 27,706 – 15 seats
  • Progressive Party of Maldives – 17,776 – 18 seats
  • Jumhoree Party – 8,089 – 6 seats

The MDP is currently the sole opposition party in the 77 member chamber. It has lost 35 party members in the past month as well as suffering from a number of defecting MPs since the resignation of former President Mohamed Nasheed on February 7.

Nasheed recently received the support of 66 percent of his party’s members last month to be the party’s nominee for the next presidential elections.

The PPM’s parliamentary group constituency leader Abdullah Yameen told Haveeru yesterday that his party is the most likely to win  a presidential election without having to form a coalition.

“But the PPM must declare a suitable and generally accepted presidential candidate. Then we can certainly avoid a second round, and win the polls in the first round itself,” Yameen said.

The party’s presidential primaries are to be held next February. President Dr Mohamed Waheed Hussein maintains that he can hold fresh elections no earlier than July 2013 without a constitutional amendment.

The largest party, by membership, in the current unity government, the DRP, was keen to stress to Minivan News last week that it had only signed an official coalition agreement with the JP.

“There has been a slight confusion. No coalition agreement was signed – we are part of a national unity government after having accepted an invitation from President Mohamed Waheed Hassan,” explained DRP Spokesperson Ibrahim Shareef.

Shareef’s comments followed the announcement of a joint parliamentary group, including all pro-government parties other than the DRP.

Days earlier, MP for unity government party the Dhivehi Qaumee Party (DQP) declared its cooperation with the DRP to have come to an end following what it perceived to have been DRP support for an MDP proposed motion in the Majlis.

The DRP was founded by former President Gayoom to contest in the country’s first ever multi-party elections in 2008. The party split after internal ructions in 2011 resulting in the formation on the PPM.

The PPM’s official representation in the Majlis was zero until April, when Ahmed Shareef won the party’s first seat in the Thimarafushi by-election.

Since that time, as well as being allowed to add MPs previously registered as ‘independents’ to its parliamentary group, the PPM has benefitted from a number of MPs crossing the floor from other parties.

Former President Gayoom believes that the party’s support will eventually see its official membership figures reach 30,000.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)