maldives – Page 210 – Minivan News

Q&A: MP Abdul Ghafoor Moosa – Kulhuduffushi North constituency

In a series of interviews to lead into the the 2014 parliamentary elections – scheduled for March 22nd – Minivan News will be conducting interviews with incumbent MPs.

All 77 sitting members have been contacted, from across the political spectrum, to be asked a standardised set of questions with additional topicals. The interviews will be published as and when they are received.

As part of the series, Minivan News interviewed MP Abdul Ghafoor Moosa.

MP Moosa represents the Kulhuduffushi North constituency and is from the opposition Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP), being originally elected as an independent candidate before signing for the MDP in 2010.

Daniel Bosley: What made you enter the political arena and how?

Abdul Ghafoor Moosa: In my area, in the north, during President [Maumoon Abdul] Gayoom’s regime there was no development at all, so we are joining the politics because we wanted some development of the area.

DB: Based on your attendance and work in this ending term, how would you judge your performance as an MP?

AGM: I have been in attendance at all the sessions and also have performed very well in the parliament, so I am happy about that.

DB: What are the main committees you were acting on? What particular bills did you focus on?

AGM: I have been on the Public Accounts Committee, and also the the Members Privileges Committee.

Members Privileges Committee concerns privileges of the members, the Public Accounts Committee involves the whole finance of the country and also to see what are the problems [and] where the government’s funds will be realised.

DB: What would you say are the biggest achievements within your term; in terms of what you have accomplished for your constituency and the country as a whole?

AGM: During the MDP government, we have gotten the maximum number of projects for Kulhuduffushi – like road construction and sewerage. I have looked after my people very well.

DB: What would you say is the biggest mistake or worst step you have taken in your career? Why?

AGM: In politics? So far, nothing. I don’t have anything for which I feel regret – I never did.

DB: Are you taking the optional committee allowance of an additional MVR 20,000? Why or why not?

AGM: Yes. Because my people aren’t bothered about anything I’m doing regarding the financial status – what I get I will spend to them. So they have no complaints about the salary or allowance whatsoever. There’s no complaints from my people – they never asked me not to take it.

DB: And if they did?

AGM: Then I don’t take it. There never have been any complaints regarding that. What we believe is that we are getting what we deserve. You see like government ministers, they are getting paid MVR62,000 salary, their phone bill, their car, their allowance, driver, fuel, transport – all in all it comes to around MVR180-190,000 per month. Same as court judges.

You see, if you want to go to our area, the airfare plus the transport – everything will cost about MVR6000, plus accommodation and everything. A return trip to my area will cost MVR20,000 – because, a boat cost will be MVR2500 one way, so two-way will be about MVR5000. Plus airfare is about MVR2,500.

DB: What is your view about parliamentarians and other public servants declaring their financial assets publicly for the electorate to be able to refer to?

AGM: At the moment it is there, but there is no system in the country to evaluate it. Because they are asking us to declare our assets, but there is no law – they have no right to materialise any of this legally. So what is the use? There should be a law, because the reason to declare the wealth is so they can see if there is any corruption or anything but even other government authorities don’t have any authority to check my account.

It is good to have it, but the effect is not there – there’s no income tax law here, so how can they verify my income and everything? They cannot say anything I have is illegal unless the income tax and all these things are there. The way they are doing it now – we have to declare how much money is in the account, that is my personal money which was in the account, and how much personal expenses I have, and the amount of shares I have in the company. Nothing more than that – so that is not enough to work on an investigation even.

Very rich people are in the parliament – people that don’t want to declare everything.

DB: Are you contesting in the next elections? What do you hope to accomplish should you be elected for a new term?

AGM: Yes. I have a few things to be done. Still the public health sector is lacking. What we believe is that the north is very much different from the south, and also from Malé. So we need a lot of economic activity to be done there, most important is that Hanimaadhoo airport has to invested in – because we see even Haa Dhaalu has no resort, in Haa Alif we have a few but these resorts they have paid their management four times and they’re not paying to the government or even the staff. It is not actually economically viable for these things without the airport. Airport depends on the jobs – everything. You know, we should have more economic activities, because otherwise people are not surviving there – there’s no things happening there.

So that’s my next hope, to have Hanimaadhoo airport invested in and to had Kulhuduffushi hospital developed. You go anywhere – our hospital they only have oxygen and aspirin. How can they call it a hospital? It is like a medical centre – people have to know these things very well. IGMH and Kulhuduffushi hospitals should be at the same level. We don’t have any facilities – for everything they have to come to Malé. It is worse that when MDP was in power – there’s no proper doctors, there’s no specialists.

DB: What improvements do you feel the 18th parliament will need to make to improve as an institution?

AGM: We are in a changing process. Still things are not in a proper way. This is the first Majlis, we are sitting in the first Majlis, that has been democratically elected. So, even the government is not fully mature to have a fully democratic system. You see, whenever an authority criticises the government, even whether the the government are MDP or PPM [Progressive Party of Maldives] or whatever, the government takes it personally in the sense like they are not acting on a fact basis – and this is the problem.

They are not happy with the auditor general, they are not happy with the Anti-Corruption Commission, they are not happy with the Civil Service Commission, even the Human Rights Commission. Because the government cannot cope with these things. They always think these people are criticising they are supporting some other party – there’s no issue base. Then they don’t want to give budget to them, they are financially tightening, so many things are happening. So this is the problem we are facing today.

Even the present government is not happy with the auditor general. If there’s something wrong he has to write in the audit report. It’s nothing personal, but the government can’t cope with these things. It was happening in the MDP government also – even now we see the same things repeat.

DB: What are your thoughts on party switching – do you think it undermines the party system?

AGM: Party switching – you see we have 35 or 34 members in MDP – there are few people who was always floor-crossing. Those people are doing it, other than these we don’t have these issues with other members.

It is a problem everywhere in the world, not just in the Maldives. That same problem is continuing here and even you are likely to see in India and Pakistan this is happening.

The problem is here, the system is not working – the people they are changing the party due to some issues like the government is influencing the judiciary to attack the actions against all these and all these and these. Those things are there very much.

DB: What do you feel the major issues of concern will be for your constituents over the next five years?

AGM: As I mentioned, the health sector is very poor and there is no economic activity. Over fifty percent in the north are below the poverty level. Most of the families – maybe five or six members – only one or two persons will be earning the income – which is not more than eight or nine thousand. Still they need economic activity. If they don’t get it, it’s very difficult to survive. We have to cross the poverty level – the only option is that we have more economic activity.

The only option we are left with is the guest house policy. In the north we have very big, very beautiful islands where the locals are living, and in those islands we have ample space. A few islands we have about 5-6km beach. You know, guest house policy can work out there very nicely. But even this government is not preparing for that. That is the only option where they can get a job and be on their own island. When they can’t find a job from their island, there are a lot of other social problems – family will be living there and they will be working here [Malé] for one or two year, they went back home, there are a lot of problems.

People want to get jobs in their own place which we can do easily if the government would just support that. But those things are not happening – you know Hanimaadhoo airport? – this airport has been operating for 25 years, but still to develop it into an international airport the government doesn’t need to spend any money on this. Only thing is they have to give it to a party to do it – they can give one or two islands for that, they can give a 50 year contract for that. Last time when they called for tender, 29 parties submitted their plans but when the government changes they have all been thrown to the dustbin now. We want this airport to be a big-time airport. Tourism is the only option for the time being.

We have huge islands where agriculture can be done, plus aquaculture can also be done, but for the time being even Hanimaadhoo could be developed within one year’s time and we could have a good income there.

Likes

(0)Dislikes

(0)

Police examining reports of local celebrities’ misconduct in Sri Lankan nightclub

The Maldives Police Service has confirmed it is looking into allegations of sexual misconduct and consumption of alcohol made against local celebrities by news website “mvyouth”.

In a report recently published on the website, Mvyouth accused seven local celebrities – actors, dancers, a singer, a fashion designer and a film director – of engaging in illegal activity at a Sri Lankan nightclub.

According to the website, four of their reporters traveled to Sri Lanka to confirm rumors about movie stars who frequently go to “party” there. The report says they followed the celebrities into a night club where they witnessed them getting drunk, dancing and being intimate, and kissing each other and other people at the club.

The Maldives penal code allows prosecution of crimes Maldivian citizens commit abroad. Kissing and sexual intimacy out of wedlock are considered as sexual offenses while consumption of alcohol is a hadd crime in shariah law, which guides the legal system in the country’s inhabited islands.

It also stated that some of the Maldivian group got into a fight, something the report described as “common among Maldivians who frequent nightclubs in Lanka”. While it mentioned several other Maldivians who were at the club, the celebrities remained the focus of the report.

Confirming that they are looking into the matter, police noted that they have not launched an investigation into the matter but will do so if it is required. Speaking to Minivan News, a police media official said that no one had lodged a complaint concerning the issue yet. However, since it has come to their attention they will now be looking in to the matter.

According to the report, mvyouth has evidence to back all its allegations. Confirming this, the website’s editor Musharraf Hassan said Mvyouth is fully prepared to defend themselves in court if they are to face defamation charges.

He said that a lot of Maldivians engage in such activity in Sri Lanka and mvyouth’s intention was to bring this to the attention of public.

“We want to inform the public on what Maldivians are up to when they are abroad. It is not specific to celebrities, a lot of Maldivians do such things”. Musharraf said.

Likes

(1)Dislikes

(0)

Comment: Some Conservatives failed over Mandela – others are failing now over climate change

I am a Conservative and an environmentalist – a position, it seems, that is increasingly irreconcilable. Australia’s centre-right administration is busy dismantling a carbon tax. Canada’s Conservative Government has withdrawn from the Kyoto Protocol. And, in the United States, the Tea Party is purging Republicans who agree with the 97 per cent of climate scientists who say that human activity is causing global warming.

As a politician (and former president) of the Maldives – one of the world’s most climate-vulnerable nations – this places me in a quandary. A believer in free markets, small government and globalisation, I feel a natural kinship with the school of thought that brought us Thatcherism and Reaganomics. But the Maldives lies just 1.5 meters above the rising seas. To deny the dangers of climate change is to ignore my country’s greatest national security threat.

I suspect I am not alone in this predicament. As climate change bites, more and more world leaders are forced to grapple with its consequences: fiercer droughts, wildfires, storms and floods. A denialist, Conservative movement has no solutions to offer these countries and therefore risks irrelevancy.

It also leaves Conservatives on the wrong side of history. Over the past few weeks, as the world commemorates Nelson Mandela, an uncomfortable spotlight has been shone on Conservatives who branded the ANC as terrorists in the 1980s. How will today’s crop of Conservative climate refuseniks explain themselves to future generations, in a world made hotter, nasty and poor by global warming?

Strong action today to curb emissions should prevent catastrophic climate change. But if we ignore the issue for another decade, we face a world of soaring temperatures, ferocious storms and a climate out of control. Future generations will hold Conservatives responsible for wrecking the planet.

My party, the Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP), owes much to the Conservative movement. They have provided us with ideological inspiration and practical know-how. Britain’s Conservative Party taught the MDP how to campaign – invaluable support in a young democracy like the Maldives. We are also grateful to conservative-run governments, such as Canada’s, who pressured the Maldives to hold recent elections when the country looked like it might slip back into dictatorship. The actions of politicians such as David Cameron, William Hague and John Baird, in support of democracy in a far off land, demonstrate the very best in enlightened leadership. When our movement is capable of exemplary governance, why do so many Conservatives let us down on climate change?

It was not always like this. Teddy Roosevelt founded America’s national park system. Richard Nixon introduced the Clean Air Act and established the Environmental Protection Agency. Margaret Thatcher and Ronald Reagan signed the Montreal Protocol to limit CFCs. And George H Bush introduced a cap-and-trade system to curb acid rain. But contemporary politicians fail to uphold one of the founding principles of Conservatism: the duty to conserve. There is nothing Conservative about advocating for the destruction of the climate, and thus all we hold dear. This is not a credible Conservative standpoint: it is reckless and extreme.

Our movement’s pro-fossil fuel advocacy also flies in the face of the free market economics we espouse. The oil, gas and coal industries have benefited from a century of subsidies and tax breaks. So why are we continuing to subsidise highly profitable and polluting fossil fuel firms, while choking off support for clean energy? We are not supposed to be the fossil fuel industry’s trade union.

Capitalism, free trade and globalisation have lifted hundreds of millions of people out of poverty and helped countries, such as my own, graduate from developing to middle income status. We owe a lot to neoclassical economics. But as any economist will tell you, markets sometime fail. The modern economy allows companies to dump dangerous greenhouse gasses into the atmosphere at no cost. The responsible, Conservative approach to this problem is to price and/or regulate these emissions.

Fortunately, this position is starting to find acceptance, even in the unlikeliest quarters. ExxonMobil, ConocoPhillips, Chevron, BP and Shell are already planning their future growth on the expectation that governments will impose a price on carbon emissions. If oil companies can accept the inevitability of climate action, why can’t Conservative politicians?

Enough of this antediluvian denialism – it is time for climate conscious Conservatives to speak out. We should ask ourselves what Churchill, Thatcher or Reagan would do. Even in the face of vested interests or powerful opponents, they would not shirk their responsibilities. They would lead the fight to conserve our climate.

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)

PPM initiates discussions with Adhaalath Party to jointly contest elections

The ruling Progressive Party of Maldives (PPM) has initiated discussions with coalition partner, the religious conservative Adhaalath Party (AP), to jointly contest in the upcoming parliamentary elections.

While dismissing rumours of having left the government coalition, the AP has announced that it will be contesting in both the parliamentary and local council elections separately from the other coalition members.

The party has further announced that all of its parliamentary candidates will possess educational qualifications to a postgraduate level.

Last week, the AP announced that it had made no agreements regarding working together in the local council and parliamentary elections with the government coalition. Party spokesperson Ali Zahir informed local media that, having worked with the coalition to succeed in the second round of 2013’s presidential elections “without setting any conditions”, the party did not have any subsequent obligation in the upcoming elections.

He said that unlike the other parties in the coalition, the AP was not promised a specific percentage of slots to contest in the upcoming elections. While admitting that the separate candidates could give rise to complications in some constituencies, Zahir claimed that there was no misunderstanding between the party and its coalition members.

“While there were no discussions among the parties’ leadership, in most areas contestants came out after discussion with coalition members in that particular constituency. However, there are some areas in which there might be have been some clashes between who is contesting,” Zahir was quoted as saying.

On Saturday, AP leader Sheikh Imran Abdulla stated that, while the party had held discussions with the Jumhooree Party (JP) about contesting local council elections, no “meaningful or detailed discussions” had been held with the main coalition party PPM.

“When there is less than 24 hours left, and PPM still does not decide on the matter or speak with us about it, and we proceed to separately submit the candidacy form of our contestants, I don’t believe it can be termed as our initiative to separately contest,” Imran said then.

He stated that at an island-level, the parties still worked together, with a view to resolving matters amicably through inter-party deliberations. He too admitted that certain disappointment had arisen in a small number of constituencies regarding those contesting.

Imran asserted that the AP had no issues with coalition members and repeated that he remained steadfast in his belief that the AP had backed PPM in the presidential elections as a crucial sacrifice to protect Islam and the nation.

“Perhaps the PPM is so busy with handling other governing matters within the executive. This might explain their delay in initiating discussions with us,” Imran opined.

PPM initiates discussions with AP

On Monday, the PPM announced that it had commenced discussions with the AP to jointly contest in the parliamentary elections.

“We have started discussions on the matter with Islamic Minister Shaheem and AP President Imran. AP has decided to compile a special team to engage in these discussions. Our intention is to allow opportunities for AP to contest within the coalition with, of course, consideration to other member parties,” PPM Parliamentary Group Deputy Leader Moosa Zameer told local media.

Zameer stated that while an agreement could not be reached in regard to the local council elections – owing to its immensity – he remains positive that a mutual agreement can be reached in relation to the parliamentary elections.

Speaking at a rally in Dhaalu atoll on Sunday, President Abdulla Yameen called on AP to raise national above personal interest.

“Adhaalath Party has now decided to leave the coalition and contest individually in the upcoming elections. However, we must not allow space for disintegration and creation of factions within the coalition as a result of this,” Yameen said then.

He stated that Adhaalath’s decision would lead to votes being split between the coalition parties and would facilitate opposition parties in winning seats.

“Things don’t end just by getting elected to run a government. We come to power to serve the people. For that, it is vital to get the cooperation of councils and the parliament,” Yameen said, adding it will be impossible to reach goals without the support of these institutions.

“Despite coming to government with numerous pledges, it is reasons like this that inhibit a government from fulfilling its promises. This is what citizens must think about. You elected me to accomplish certain things for the citizens. For me to able to complete this, you citizens must ensure that you elect the cooperation that I require, that you give me the empowerment that I need,” Yameen stated.

Yameen called on the AP to extend cooperation to the coalition during the upcoming elections similar to their support during the past presidential elections.

Likes

(0)Dislikes

(0)

PPM “obstructing” elections: MDP

The opposition Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) has alleged that the ruling Progressive Party of the Maldives (PPM) had stopped signing voter lists for the January 18 local council elections to “obstruct” the vote.

The PPM claims the party was not given sufficient time to crosscheck 16 voter lists. According to the Elections Commission (EC), 295 independent candidates had also declined to sign lists, claiming they did not have the funds to travel to and stay in Malé for the approval of the register.

Condemning the ruling party’s decision, MDP in a statement today said it believed PPM’s “sudden decision to stop signing voters lists on baseless allegations is part of the party’s continued agenda to obstruct free and fair elections.”

Candidate signatures on voter lists were stipulated by the Supreme Court in its 16 electoral guidelines issued following the annulment of the first round of presidential polls held on September 7, 2013. The EC has described the guidelines as restrictions.

The police stopped a re-vote on October 19, 2013 at the eleventh hour after the PPM and the Jumhooree Party refused to sign voter lists.

The EC has long argued candidates are not required to crosscheck lists, but the Supreme Court had required candidate signatures to ensure the lists present at the polling booths are prepared by the commission.

The Supreme Court’s guidelines effectively give veto over elections to candidates and “undermines the power of the institution and contaminates the electoral process,” the MDP said.

According to the MDP, the Commonwealth – in an unpublished report – has criticised the Supreme Court’s issuance of 16 guidelines as beyond the court’s mandate, arguing that only the People’s Majlis has the legal power to compile such a guideline.

“We do not believe a free and fair election can be held as long as the Supreme Court continues to influence the Elections Commission,” the statement said

The MDP has called on political parties to allow the EC to work independently, and to allow citizens to exercise their vote in a free and fair election without bribery and undue influence.

The Maldives Police Services has previously told local media it will seek legal advice on how to proceed should candidates refuse to sign the lists.

However, speaking to Minivan News today, a police media official said the police will seek advice once the EC reaches a decision. EC President Fuwad Thowfeek said the EC is currently discussing the issue.

Fuwad has suggested the EC may hold elections in all the constituencies where lists have been signed.

Speaking to Minivan News on Sunday, Fuwad condemned the PPM’s decision suggesting that the party does not have “good intentions.”

PPM’s coalition partners – the JP, the Adhaalath Party, the Maldives Democratic Alliance (MDA) – and the MDP have completed signing all lists.

“If elections are delayed, it will increase expenditure and present a number of issues. We will not be able to hold elections within the constitutionally mandated deadline,” Fuwad said.

The EC has asked the Attorney General for advice on following Supreme Court guidelines, but has not received an answer yet, said Thowfeek.

Likes

(0)Dislikes

(0)

Q&A: MP Ahmed Nihan – Villi Maafannu Constituency

In a series of interviews to lead into the the 2014 parliamentary elections – scheduled for March 22nd – Minivan News will be conducting interviews with incumbent MPs.

As part of the series, Minivan News interviewed MP Ahmed Nihan.

MP Ahmed Nihan represents the Villi Maafannu constituency and is from the ruling Progressive Party of Maldives (PPM).

Mariyath Mohamed: What made you enter the political arena and how?

Ahmed Nihan: To be honest, I didn’t enter this field to achieve any major political goals. However, there are certain things that circumstances brought about. Namely, the political chaos of 2003.

We were used to a very normal, peaceful way of life. The society we grew up in was not one where political dialogue in public places were common. It is not even important. If there was a cause for disheartenment, most people kept it to themselves. However, even then there were some people who would talk about such issues both in public places and through media. It was not even done after considering what sort of penalties may be levied against them for doing so. We were, however, aware that those who were being jailed for participating in political activity were being placed in that situation due to the involvement of other factors besides political expression.

For example, the bombing of 1990. Those allegedly involved in the bombing later became major political figures. While they may have their reasons for committing such an act, it is never acceptable for violence, arson or terrorism to be used as a solution for anything. In 2003, I closely saw the situation deteriorate in Malé. As a bystander, I saw three or four places being set ablaze.

I thought then that the peaceful atmosphere of Male’ was coming to an end. While I don’t mean that everything was happening right then, I felt that anti-social elements would then seep in and damage the general social norms of the Malé society. Whatever good or bad reasons behind it, I was aware that anti-social elements would come in.

A cause for widespread political discussions in the country was the announcement made by then President Maumoon Abdul Gayoom on 9 June 2004, where he said the people were free to discuss political matters publicly. I will not judge whether the intentions behind the announcement were good or bad, but that is the reason for increased politicisation within the society.

Friends and I then started having long discussions about this matter over coffee meet-ups, where intellectuals from across the political divide frequently joined. It so happened that one other friend and I took the side of the then incumbent government. It was purely from my own views, as I had no other connection to the government. Neither me nor any of my relatives were serving in Gayoom’s administration, none of us had any businesses we needed to protect, there was no child we need to send abroad to study, at the very least we did not even possess a vehicle in our names. Despite all of this, I was among the few who accepted Gayoom’s policies as being right.

In March 2005, following the parliament’s approval of multi party democracy, we faced a lot of political challenges. Everyone was identified as a political person. Even then, I had no intention of joining any particular party. However, from my childhood, I have always been a fan of Gayoom’s. I especially liked his policies on nationalism.

On May 29, 2005, I learned while I was at a coffee with friends that Gayoom was going to form a party. I decided to go for two reasons. One is that it is a common rumour here that Gayoom operated via nepotism and cronyism and would not allow a commoner into their inner circle. I wanted to see if this is true. I did not enter politics on anyone’s intention, at 34 years of age I just knocked at the door of the meeting place uninvited.

At the meeting, I saw that it was filled with elite persons and children of high level officials, and I couldn’t accept that although the meeting was for a youth audience, there was enough representation of general youth there.

I was outspoken and questioned Gayoom, asking if he believed there is enough youth representation there. I asked if he was aware of the criticism against him in the public. I then volunteered in preparation of the first two party meetings but there was absolutely no chance of going to the frontline at that point.

At the third public meeting held on June 13 – Gayoom’s party still had elites in it, while MDP was at its peak already – at this point, then government spokesperson Dr Ahmed Shaheed called me and asked me to speak in that night’s meeting. This was not due to any connections, but probably because I had been so outspoken at this first meeting.

He was the first person to plant the idea of comparing MDP’s Mohamed Nasheed to Adolf Hitler, by asking me to make the comparison in my first political speech. He asked me to point out that nothing good may come to a party through a politician leading groups on to the street and to point out the likeness between how Nasheed operated and how the Nazi party had operated in the past.

No one in the higher tiers had thus far dared to criticise the MDP. This speech of mine was very well-received and people accepted me. I then became a member of DRP’s council. I was the only ordinary member on it. This is how I entered the field.

MM: Based on your attendance and work in this ending term, how would you judge your performance as an MP?

AN: For me, especially being an MP who lives out of Malé, I will say I performed well over average. I’m the only member who starts his day on a ferry. Despite the political situation I walk through the public and travel on a ferry with them every day, that is my way of life.

Except for a few days where I had to be involved with other issues, I have not missed any Majlis sessions. Later on, I have met with some VilliMale’ constituents during Majlis hours to listen to their concerns, but even then I do come to Majlis in time for voting on bills. Even this was possible after the starting quorum was changed to an open quorum and things became more convenient.

I have also missed some of the latter committee meetings as I had to involved in the [presidential election] campaigns.

MM: What are the main committees you were acting on? What particular bills did you focus on?

AN: I was in many fundamental committees. This is because due to the political situation, there was a lot of space for waste arguments. For example, matters around the judiciary.

One of the committees I was on for the longest and contributed most to is the Social Affairs committee. This is the committee that compiled some of the most important bills. For example, the Act on Special Measures Against Perpetrators of Child Sexual Abuse.

I was also on the Economic Affairs Committee, with the intention of learning something new. I figured the best way to learn about the matter once budgetary issues arose would be through the Economic Affairs committee.

The Public Accounts Committee is what parliamentarians often saw as the most privileged committee, due to the many opportunities for trips abroad that rose out of it. However, I did not push to be on it. The other committee most in demand by parliamentarians is the 241 Committee on national security.

I gave the most importance to the Petition Committee, Economic Affairs Committee and the Social Affairs Committee. After February 7, on request of the government, I joined the Executive Oversight Committee to defend the government through my concrete arguments.

The bills I played the most major role in completing include the Act on Special Measures Against Perpetrators of Child Sexual Abuse, the Drug Act, Banking Acts and the Right to Information Act.

One of the saddest things I came across is that the Water Bill that was submitted by the government was thrown out of parliament without even allowing it to go to committee stage. I individually spoke to several MPs about the importance of having litigation on water standards here, but no one listened, and MDP members voted it out just by yelling “baaghee” [traitor] at government-affiliated members.

However, the most major bill that I must carry responsibility for is the Act on Privileges for Former Presidents. This is something that had to be done, Article 128 of the Constitution mandates that such a law be formed. Yes, it was designed for Gayoom, but it later applied to former Presidents Nasheed and Waheed, so it can no longer be said that I made it for Gayoom alone.

MM: What would you say are the biggest achievements within your term; in terms of what you have accomplished for your constituency and the country as a whole?

AN: I was in a challenging position as an opposition member in a Malé area seat. I was steadfast in not changing my position, despite large offers being placed in front of me in exchange for switching. The 17th parliament was corrupted not by parliamentarians alone, but with the involvement of political leaders. It was done deliberately. For example, Ali Waheed and I worked six or seven months working closely together and I know his financial level. It is not acceptable for me that he and Alhan Fahmy all of a sudden reached a level of financial comfortability where they were able to purchase land from capital city, Malé. That is against the oath we took assuming public office. The reason behind why I remain homeless to date is the loyalty I have towards the Maldivian people. MDP sent numerous multi-million offers asking me to defect, but I do not believe it is the right thing to do.

So, what I did for my consituency is a huge question. In reality, there is nothing I am mandated to do for the constituency. I am not elected to represent a constituency so that I can take material things there. I have not been able to do that, and will not do so in future either. On the other hand, I am the conveyer of the constituency’s concerns. There is no other MP who has done as much as I have on this front. There never goes much time between my appearance in some media or other.

An MP’s mandate is not to build mosques, or construct roads or football grounds. That is not our mandate. I have conducted about 90 percent or more of what is in my mandate. I have not sold a vote or misvoted by mistake or done any other such actions.

MM: What would you say is the biggest mistake or worst step you have taken in your career? Why?

AN: Not something I did out of my own capacity, but I’d say it was the compiling of the judge’s bench by the parliament’s bench during our initial days. It is definitely something that we as members didn’t look into enough that we were not used as much as we should have been when our leaders made the decisions regarding the judiciary and it’s compilation.

Not to defend myself, but I am a person who doesn’t personally know these judges. And today, being 42 years of age I have never had to stand in front of a judge. And the most controversial judge Abdulla Ghazi (Criminal Court Chief Judge Abdulla Mohamed). I even saw him for the first time way after he was released from detention, at a National Day event held during the Waheed administration. So it was difficult for me as I couldn’t identify them.

But I do regret some of the problems that have risen as a result of those decisions.

The second thing is the Priviliges Act. I regret that I was unable to succeed despite always having stood up against the parlimentary privileges bill. I do not believe this is required in a place like the Maldives. Even today, it saddens me that there are still members who advocate for additional privileges.

These are not my personal decisions, but as a member, collectively I too have some responsibility in these.

MM: Are you taking the optional committee allowance of an additional MVR 20,000? Why or why not?

AN: I have never considered either taking or not taking that allowance. I did want to initially check if it proved to be an incentive for members to better attend committees. But it doesn’t work that way. There are no members that better attend committees just because this allowance is paid. So it is 100 percent evident that this need not be paid now.

And there is nothing I have gained from getting the committee allowance. There are many months where I have not received it, due to my not signing the attendance sheets. It is of my own mistake. I never considered it so important to sign the attendance sheets.

It is only paid in relation to the number of committees we attended. I think I only received it six months. Even if I receive it, it is never there by the end of the month. I would have given it away for some thing.

MM: What is your view about parliamentarians and other public servants declaring their financial assets publicly for the electorate to be able to refer to?

AN: I support that, because there is nothing I need to hide. But there are some MPs whose shares in certain businesses that citizens need to know about. About how their financial assets suddenly increase. Like I said before, when a member who enters parliament without a penny in their name suddenly rises to the point where they can purchase a 10 storey skyscraper, the people have right to know whether this was indeed purchased by money earned from selling arecanuts, teaching Quran lessons or money sent by a father who works as a sailor. The reasons are very correct and people have much right to demand to know these details. Not only parliamentarians, but everyone in senior posts. This can be included in an amendment in the Right to Information Act that has recently been passed. It must have a radius though, where the other person’s privary is not breached.

MM: Are you recontesting in the next elections?

AN: My consituency no longer exists, but I will recontest for the same district. That is to say, using a football metaphor, I must play another half, another term, representing VilliMale’. To ensure that everything that can be done for them through their government is achieved.

MM: What do you hope to accomplish should you be elected for a new term?

AN: One thing is to ensure that someone from the district itself gets elected in the local council elections. The government has also assured me that through their development policies, unmatched developmental changes will be brought to VilliMale’ in these five years. Through my work I have also ensured that the PPM policies include providing housing for those who have the most housing difficulty in this country, including housing for those on the Malé municipality register.

MM: What improvements do you feel the 18th parliament will need to make to improve as an institution?

AN: A lot of major changes must be brought.

One thing is to make members aware that every bill that comes there way is not something that they must view through a political lens and reject or approve just based on political reasons.

The general public must also be aware that despite the excitement around politics, important issues must be focused on beyond politic rhetoric. The political atmosphere must come down to room temperature, where people with different political ideologies must be able to sit down and discuss matters in a civil manner. I believe, this will take approximately 25 years for us to achieve this.

MM: What are your thoughts on party switching – do you think it undermines the party system?

AN: There is an issue where even parliamentarians do not really understand the system. And there is a lack of information or of negligence among those who impart knowledge of these matters to the general public. It must be considered whether a member is defecting to gain some personal benefits, for the party’s benefit or for the nation’s benefit. If one has already done so for their own benefit, then it is wrong. It is wrong as it causes people to lose hope in the system itself.

If they don’t have a thorn in their tongues, they might say whatever they want, but I see no dignity in such a person coming out to recontest and saying they are doing so for the good of the nation.

If it is an independent MP, I have no comments about them being among the movers and shakers. It is not a problem for them to go around changing parties. But someone who was elected for having run via a party must not defect mid-term.

It is not for national benefit or love for the people that members like them defect or sell votes. It is because their pockets are being filled. On the day of cabinet endorsement, we too fished out many votes in this way. They will now say that it is out of love for the people, but no, it was in interest of filling their own deep pockets.

MM: As a politician who has been outspoken about matters regarding the judiciary, alternatively positively and negatively, what is your view about the current judiciary and if you believe there are steps that can be taken to improve it?

AN: Numerous major changes need to come it. These are not things that can be sorted just through litigation or changing laws. It needs to majorly improved as an institution.

I need to know judges better, their histories and capacities and all. We must all know them better. We need to better the review the problems arising about judges today and review the existing litigation. We must find out what amendments we can bring to the existing litigation, and whether more effective new laws can be drafted for the issue. Everyone from all parties need to agree on how we must act on this matter.

In June 2010, we suddenly appointed judges. So for the lack of effectiveness in the judiciary, we cannot blame the judges alone. Instead, all us politicians must shoulder responsibility for it.

Now the thing is due to one or two judges within the judiciary, the whole sector has lost trust. This is something I have often said. Don’ t blame the whole institution for the acts of a few individuals.

For example, Judge Ali Hameed who is allegedly involved in a sex scandal. I have never met him. We should not defend him for his negligence. I would have preferred it if he had resigned from his post before it comes to the level where even the parliament will need to get involved. If he had, half the country would not have lost trust in the institution.

I believe that both MDP and PPM should work to further train and make the judiciary more responsible, however this does not mean that we should continue yelling out that the judiciary is bad. We must do constructive work.

Likes

(0)Dislikes

(0)

Reethi Rah workers strike over alleged discrimination

Over ninety percent of Maldivian workers at the One & Only Reethi Rah resort are taking part in ongoing strikes in protest against perceived ill-treatement by management.

The strike was called following the management’s failure to meet employees to discuss concerns regarding discrimination against local workers, the Tourism Employment Association of Maldives (TEAM) has confirmed.

Secretary General Mauroof Zaki confirmed that the issues included allegations of discriminatory pay and racism against local staff – including unequal benefits and promotions. Mauroof stated that senior management at the resort had refused to take the concerns of staff seriously.

“Because of these issues the majority of staff raised these issues with the management and the management response was not very productive,” said Mauroof.

He revealed that staff had visited the rooms of senior management yesterday evening but were unable to gain a response – leading the “frustrated” staff to call for a strike.

The Maldives Resort Workers blog today reported that management at the resort had “again taken the weary route of resorting to ask help from ‘higher’ authorities rather than engaging with the workers.”

“Police teams have been send to dissuade the staff from protesting and it appears that staff have been given ultimatum to stop the demo as of today,” today’s post added.

A police spokesperson confirmed that a team had been dispatched to the resort but declined to provide further details.

Human Resources Manager at Reethi Rah Manish Sadhu acknowledged that the strike was ongoing, but stated that police had arrived simply as a security precaution – describing the situation as calm.

When asked about the strikers complaints of discrimination, Manish stated that there was there were no such issues present in the resort.

Manish said that the management was now meeting with the striking workers.

Whilst not officially endorsed by TEAM, Mauroof stated that the organisation was prepared to assist Reethi Rah’s workers and was currently mediating between the parties.

Despite restrictions placed on the right to strike by the 2012 Freedom of Assembly Bill, Mauroof maintained that the option to strike was a human right, protected by the International Labour Organisation (ILO).

“It is not for police to intervene until anything illegal happens.”

Mauroof himself stated that he himself would happily join the striking workers as his own personal dispute with the company remains unresolved, in relation to what he maintains was the termination of his employment as a result of his union activities.

Two executive TEAM members were detained by police when attempting to board a staff ferry to Reethi Rah following the High Court’s overruling of their earlier dismissal.

Likes

(0)Dislikes

(0)

Comment: Islamic Scholarship and Maldivian Women – My swim against the tide

This article first appeared on Manzaru. Republished with permission.

As a Maldivian woman, and as a pursuer of Islamic scholarship, the issue of how Islamic scholarship relates to the women of this country is one that I have been faced with at various points of my academic and personal life. One thing, I found, is undeniable – there are huge challenges for women in the field of Islamic scholarship in our country.

In the Maldives, Islamic scholarship – at least on the level of public discourse – is a field almost completely monopolised by men. In Maldives, an Islamic scholar must have a beard, at least the potential to have one. A Maldivian Islamic scholar must wear his pants short, or at least must be able to do so without uncovering part of his awrah. Women, by their very nature, are unable to fulfill these conditions.

It is true that as a principle, Islam does not prevent women from studying Islamic sciences or from preaching Islam based on their knowledge. Aisha, my namesake – I have always been proud to say – and the Prophet’s wife (Peace be upon him and may Allah be pleased with her) is an Islamic scholar, who is shown as a role model to Muslim women. It is also true that many women, including myself, have been issued licenses to preach Islam by the Ministry of Islamic Affairs, and previously by the Supreme Council for Islamic Affairs. One must ask, however, how often these women do, or are given the opportunity to, address an audience at all, not to mention one comprising both genders. One cannot help but wonder whom among these women is given the opportunity to be at the forefront of the Maldivian stage of the eternal strife to promote Islam.

Thus, all issues relating to women are given but a rather reluctant and half-baked coverage – women’s education, women’s employment, marital responsibilities, family commitment, etc, are all discussed only from a man’s perspective.

The current discourse of Maldivian scholars on women’s education and employment is impractical, if not illogical. It is their stand that Islam does not prevent women from pursuing higher education. Women, in fact, are encouraged to pursue a degree in professional fields such as medicine, education, law, psychology, etc. After all, women do need the services of doctors, educators and lawyers. Who better to provide these services to women than female professionals? Thus, Maldivian women are encouraged by Islamic scholars to build dreams upon dreams of a professional career along side those of love, husband, children, family and home.

The oxymoron presents itself once these women – after having spent several years toiling away under thick volumes of reports and case studies, being trainee teachers under the supervision of stricter than hell supervisors, dissecting dead bodies, attending to injuries, and assisting surgeons in operation theatres – choose to fulfill the Sunnah of marriage and forming a family. Now, there’s no denying that the primary role of a woman upon marriage is that of a wife – and upon having a child is that of a mother. But if women are encouraged to train as professionals, should women also not be encouraged to work as professionals? Should women not be provided with suitable circumstances where they can pursue a career without undermining their roles as wives and mothers?

Unfortunately, all that I’ve heard to this day from Maldivian scholars is that women should be content to be housewives, and that being a mother is the biggest honour of all.

The same goes for the issues of marital responsibilities and family commitment. I heard a Sheikh recently speaking on radio of men who work all day and return home only to find an unwelcoming wife at home. It was his claim that this is one of the main contributors to the breakdown of marriages in our society. While I do not deny that many men do in fact grind daily to earn a good living for their families, I can’t help but wonder whether women do nothing at all. The way I understand it, it is a division of labour – women ought to take care of the family, men are the bread-winners. Neither task is more important than the other – neither can be considered harder, or easier than the other. In the end, both partners of the marriage are supposed to provide each other with support.

When a man returns from office, returns from work and spends all his time going out with friends, reading the news, or watching television, is he not neglecting part of his responsibilities? Could it not be that a woman whose emotional needs and expectations from her husband is more likely to be unwelcoming to him wheh he comes home from work to change and go meet with his friends?

The half-bakedness of the scholarly address applies even to the issue of Hijab. This age-old issue, discussed, re-discussed, and then discussed yet again has been focused only on women. The focus of the Hijab issue is so much on the female gender that one cannot help but wonder that perhaps an awrah is defined in Islam only for women. I recently watched a televised sermon of a Maldivian Islamic scholar in which he recited verses 29 and 30 of Surah Al-Nur which translate as follows:

Tell the believing men to reduce [some] of their vision and guard their private parts. That is purer for them. Indeed, Allah is Acquainted with what they do. (29) And tell the believing women to reduce [some] of their vision and guard their private parts and not expose their adornment except that which [necessarily] appears thereof and to wrap [a portion of] their headcovers over their chests and not expose their adornment except to their husbands, their fathers, their husbands’ fathers, their sons, their husbands’ sons, their brothers, their brothers’ sons, their sisters’ sons, their women, that which their right hands possess, or those male attendants having no physical desire, or children who are not yet aware of the private aspects of women. And let them not stamp their feet to make known what they conceal of their adornment. And turn to Allah in repentance, all of you, O believers, that you might succeed. (30)

Unfortunately, although the Quran first commands men to lower their gaze from viewing Haraam and to protect themselves from committing illicit deeds, the Sheikh only translated the verse that relates to women’s Hijab. Allah’s Command to believing men was purposely ignored.

Such oversight may perhaps be excused if Maldivian men do generally follow the Command to lower the gaze and guard the chastity. This, sadly, does not seem to be the case. Allah is Most Gracious, Most Wise – he limited man’s awrah to what is comprised between the navel and the knees – as opposed to the whole body of the woman, with a few body parts being the exception. Even so, many men – especially, many young men – seem unable even to cover this small area. In order to follow pop fashion – or, hip hop fashion (you name it) – many young men deem it necessary to let their pants fall way below their waist, not to mention that they deem it unnecessary to wear undergarments. The result – I’d rather not divulge in.

Another issue not to be forgotten is that of pornography. Maldivian Muslim men, like their brothers all around the world, seem to be acting under the impression that as long as you don’t view the awrah of a Muslim woman, it is permissible to view the awrah of other women in general. In the end, the general effect of dehumanising and objectifying women has been unavoidable. Reports of sexual crimes against the female gender, including crimes against children and the elderly, have been on the rise in Maldives – it is impossible to say whether the rise is in the number of crimes or the amount of reports (it in all probability is both) – and all that Maldivian scholars have been able to say is that women should cover themselves better and the government should implement Hudud.

It is my belief that Maldivian scholars find it easy to speak the same words and to address the same issues in the age-old manner without looking at them from any different angles. And this, I believe, is the ultimate wrong.

I do realise that I am only raising issues here – I have not proposed any solutions.

I have, however, started my own personal swim against the tide. I have chosen to have a child and to work. I have decided that I, as the mother of my child, will take the primary responsibility of feeding, bathing, playing with and rearing my child. I will not delegate these pleasures to a maid or babysitter. I have also decided that I, as a graduate of Shari’ah and law, will practice the law. I will pursue a career, but on my own terms. I work from home. And because my child is a toddler now – who rarely sleeps during the day and refuses to leave me and the laptop alone – I work when he, along with the rest of the world, sleeps.

Is it easy? No. Is it a sustainable solution? Definitely not. By Thursday – weekends in Maldives are Fridays and Saturdays, and that’s when I sleep – I can’t wait for the week to end. I am always wishing for one more hour in the day and a few more minutes to the hour. But, for me, it is a start.

I also have chosen to start my journey, preaching and pursuing the values of Islam, by addressing issues that many other graduates of the Shariah are shying away from. I do this with the full understanding that this is a path filled with obstacles. Be it as it may, it is my belief, that if no one else will, I ought to do the hard – and perhaps the right – thing.

I am a Maldivian woman. I am a pursuer of Islamic scholarship. I swim against the tide.

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

(1)Dislikes

(0)

Q&A: MP Eva Abdulla – Galolhu Uthuru constituency

In a series of interviews to lead into the the 2014 parliamentary elections – scheduled for March 22nd – Minivan News will be conducting interviews with incumbent MPs.

As part of the series, Minivan News interviewed MP Eva Abdulla.

Eva Abdulla is a parliamentarian from the Maldivian Democratic Party in the 17th Parliament, representing the Galolhu Uthuru constituency. She is among the only 5 female MPs out of a total of 77 MPs currently in parliament.

Mariyath Mohamed: What made you enter the political arena and how?

Eva Abdulla: The first political activity that I participated in was President [Mohamed] Nasheed’s Malé campaign [for a parliament seat representing Malé district]. I was in Malé between studying for my degree and masters in university. This was the most active political campaign that had occurred in Malé after I grew up. At the time we would be involved in preparing fliers, printing t-shirts, entering data into spreadsheets and such activities.

Even from the early 90s, we would engage in secret political activity at home, like printing t-shirts to mark the International Human Rights Day, which we could only ever wear at home. We had the chance to naturally participate in political activity from home. I got engaged in political activity as soon as I grew up and had the space to do so.

If the question is ‘why’, then I have to say that I always knew it was not right how during Maumoon’s time [the 30 year administration of former President Maumoon Abdul Gayoom] people would get jailed for speaking out or writing material which criticised the government. Even before Maumoon’s time, when I was really young, I heard of how even during Nasir’s time [Gayoom’s predecessor Ibrahim Nasir], people had been locked up for criticising the government. So from then, I believed this is not right. That people should not be penalised for writing or criticising rulers and the government.

Back when I was young, Nasheed would be continuously jailed and released. We would always visit whichever uncle or other relative of ours is imprisoned in jail or the hospital when they are brought for treatment. So this was something that impacted my views, something I closely experienced.

MM: Based on your attendance and work in this ending term, how would you judge your performance as an MP?

EA: To be honest, there were good days and bad days. Personally, I think I can safely say I give it my all. Looking at my attendance, as you know, I only took leave on two days within the five years for any personal reason. Even on the day of my son’s circumcision, I attended Majlis. It’s not quantitatively that I would look at this. If at all, I get frustrated when the results come out.

First of all, although MDP was in the executive, we were a minority party in parliament. And so, passing anything became such a big struggle. For example, the income tax bill. In our view, with the tax regime that we introduced, the income tax bill is extremely critical, something that needs to be implemented regardless of how small a percentage we take. And yet, it still remains pending in parliament, despite being in committee for four years already.

Then there is the selection of people to various boards. It is not the most suitable people we have selected to be on these boards due to the political struggles involved. The Supreme Court bench is the best example I can give. On the day that nominations were made for this bench, I walked out of my own parliamentary group meeting crying. Things have gone to this extent. But the thing is, to bring results, we have to work within a group, and with external parties as well. So there are days where I get extremely frustrated.

However, I personally don’t judge performance based on whether I spoke well, or I attended well, but rather with consideration of the results we manage to obtain. The 17th parliament is the most prolific parliament in our history when we tally our work, having passed the maximum number of bills. This is the parliament that had the most public engagement.

This is the parliament that was constantly criticised by the public, and rightly so. And yet, if we are to compare it with past parliaments, it is only now that people have the opportunity to see how parliament performs, with the beginning of sessions being publicly broadcast on TV channels.

MM: What are the main committees you were acting on?

EA: The Economic Committee, and all the tax committees and the Budget Committee – which I sat on in relation to my seat on the Economic Committee. I had my heart set on the Budget Committee from the time I first joined parliament. This is because, for me, the budget needs to be well-compiled in order to dictate policy or responsibly run an executive.

MM: What particular bills did you focus on most passionately? You are seen as a parliamentarian who is often outspoken about gender rights issues.

EA: Yes, gender issues are important. But while this may sound dry, tax related bills and decentralisation laws are, in my heart, equally important.

The thing with gender related issues is that there is only a handful of people who are willing to stand up for them. You would have heard some of the statements that some parliamentarians have made about such issues. So for such bills to succeed, us handful of female parliamentarians need to put up a very strong fight.

If it is things like tax or decentralisation, all of MDP is willing to back it. But when it comes to gender issues, I feel a personal responsibility to make sure it is done right.

The anti-torture bill – because of my personal experiences within my family, things we have seen and heard of happening in the country, and especially the case of Evan Naseem, I have since then wanted to establish an anti-torture bill in the Maldives. I have done this as soon as I got into parliament. That wasn’t sponsored by MDP, but my own privately submitted bill. That is what I most passionately worked on.

MM: What would you say are the biggest achievements within your term; in terms of what you feel you have accomplished for your constituency and the country as a whole?

EA: First of all, laws are not made with a focus on the constituency, or the political party. It is made with the nation in mind. When an MDP government was formed in 2008, and the parliamentary elections came across in 2009, we set out with a legislative agenda. This included decentralisation, forming a tax regime, forming legislation to ascertain social security for all citizens, health insurance…these are groundbreaking things that occurred in the Maldives. These are things that reached implementation due to MDP coming to government, forming policies and passing laws to implement these policies, and I am very proud of those.

For example, responding to something Riyaz Rasheed said in parliament in 2011, I said that he is criticising us for the introduction of a tax regime, but that I am sure that whichever government comes to power, they will not eradicate the tax regime, but will bring some changes to it. Take a look now, isn’t that what has happened? Today, we wouldn’t be able to get even an income like we are getting now if not for that tax regime we introduced.

MM: What would you say is the biggest mistake or worst step you have taken in your political career? Why?

EA: There have been times when I did not stand up to the level I ought to have for certain matters within the party. I am not speaking of things which personally impacted me alone. But a couple of things about which, two or three years later, I wish I had done more.

MM: Are you taking the optional committee allowance of an additional MVR 20,000? Why or why not?

EA: I’m not. Because it is ridiculous.

Even when it was first submitted to parliament – and the public was not yet aware of its details – I was among the first to say no to it. I voted against it from day one. Also, it was something that was brought in very much on the sly, including it among many other points in a huge document about the public finance law. Many parliamentarians who do not take the allowance unknowingly voted for it due to this reason.

Of course I won’t take it. For one thing, people did not know I would receive this when they elected me. I don’t want any perks that people did not know I would receive when they voted me in.

MM: What is your view about parliamentarians and other public servants declaring their financial assets publicly for the electorate to be able to refer to?

EA: While it is invasive, I personally don’t mind. There are many members elected to parliament about whom the electorate needs to know what they are involved in. There are few parliamentarians, who, like me, are not involved in some private business. If we are to look at the financial declaration [as it is submitted to the parliament secretariat now], there is no difference between me and Gasim [MP, Leader of Jumhooree Party and Chairman of Villa Enterprises Gasim Ibrahim]. But everyone knows this cannot be true. So yes, make it public.

MM: What are your thoughts on party switching – do you think it undermines the party system?

EA: I think it is something that some people do because the party system in the Maldives is still very young. I’d like to think that it simply won’t happen in the next parliament.

I have to say the multi-party system is well accepted, as everyone besides 14 out of 77 parliamentarians were elected through a political party. Now when the five year term is coming to end, only about two out of those 14 independent parliamentarians still remain without signing to a party. So, the majority of people running for parliament are aware that it is through a party that you can best get your message across.

I would never switch parties. If I am elected through a particular party, I would personally see it as a betrayal to the electorate if I switch to another party. I strongly believe that I should remain for the five years as I was when I was initially elected. Once the five year terms ends, a person can bring whatever changes they like, but the electorate should get what they voted for.

MM: What improvements do you feel the 18th Parliament will need to make to improve as an institution?

EA: Firstly, something that the public rarely sees, the work conducted in parliamentary committees. This needs to be done in a far more responsible and professional manner. I personally see the work done in committees as being more important that even the work done on the floor.

We also need the required staff. In parliaments in other countries, they provide members with staff who have the required expertise. This is still not done here, and members are expected to have a knowledge about everything.

A lot of it also depends on who people vote in. People who can stay on topic and who can stick to the issue at hand without resorting to personal attacks need to be elected. We need to move beyond petty political agendas.

MM: Are you re-contesting in the next elections? Why? What do you hope to accomplish should you be elected for a new term?

EA: Yes, I am re-contesting. First, we are an opposition party now and we have the opportunity to show how an opposition party works responsibly. As you saw, when MDP was in power, the opposition’s focus was on toppling the government. Their intention was not to defeat the government in the next elections, but to topple them from the streets and that, in the end, is what they did.

Instead of this, when we work as an opposition – and god willing I am re-elected – we will bear in mind that despite not being in the government, there is a legislative agenda that we must push for. MDP had a manifesto when we contested in the presidential elections. This manifesto includes in it what we feel to be the best that the country deserves. While I am not saying that we will try to have the incumbent government work to implement our manifesto, I believe we have a responsibility to push forward and try to have the government deliver to the people the best that the people deserve.

This includes some legislative changes. One example is that we need to clean up this judiciary. As an opposition, that has to be our priority. The five year changes in government is almost meaningless in a place where justice cannot be served. There’s a lot the parliament needs to do make the judiciary, and independent commissions, more accountable.

MM: While there is little public criticism about the work you do in parliament, there is often allegations in public that you have reached your political position through familial connections. That although you are elected, this is due to the influence of certain figures within your family. What is your reaction to this allegation?

EA: I don’t think I can get away from it, it is what it is. President Nasheed is the most iconic figure currently in this country, the most popular individual here. That he is my family, a relative, I cannot get away from. But just because he is a relative does not mean I will stop what I am doing, either.

If you take a look at my campaign, he doesn’t even step into Galolhu. It’s something that the whole of Galolhu even complains about, but he has his reasons because he is so personally connected to them.

There are many reasons why a person gets elected, but there are even more reasons why someone will get re-elected. Let’s then see if I get re-elected.

If there is little criticism about my work, that is good. If the criticism is about my blood relatives, there is nothing I can do.

Likes

(0)Dislikes

(0)