Tag: Politics

Parliament installs internet touch screens for MPs

The Maldivian parliament has installed touch-screens for the use of MPs, that display the agenda and relevant documents such as bills and the constitution.

The technology will allow MPs to browse the internet during sessions of parliament.

Secretary General Ahmed Mohamed told Haveeru that “it is one of our main objectives to utilize the latest technology on the parliament floor.”

“Despite the fact that the system has not been implemented up to our expectations, the members will be able to see a lot of documents even now. We will be developing the system,” he said.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Q&A: Former UK MP for Salisbury Robert Key talks democracy in the Maldives

Robert Key was the UK’s MP for Salisbury between 1983 and 2010, and member of cabinet during Margaret Thatcher and John Major’s administration. He was responsible for bringing the Maldives to the attention of both the British parliament and the Westminster Foundation for Democracy. He has supported the country’s path to democracy ever since current President Mohamed Nasheed walked into his constituency office and made his case.

Minivan News spoke to Key during his first visit to the Maldives.

JJ Robinson: Was it difficult to visit the Maldives while a serving MP, given its image as a holiday destination?

Robert Key: No it’s not difficult, because there are organisations that do it such as the Inter-Parliamentary Union and the Commonwealth Parliamentary Association – they all do organised visits, with a political purpose.

But to be completely free of politics and party and able to take a more academic interest in it – I was a teacher for 16 years before I was a politician – has been a great privilege.

In five days I have had a political reeducation. Because a lot of the aspirations I have taken for granted as a British politician do not necessarily apply in the culture of the Maldives.

JJ: What sort of aspirations?

RK: Aspirations towards human rights, for example. In my political life in the UK, human rights have always been an important issue on the political agenda, have has always been seen as virtuous and necessary, and have always been pressed for by the electorate.

I have to realise this is not the case for all people in the Maldives, who have come across human rights only in the last year or two. It’s a new and challenging idea for them, and they are not quite sure what it means. I’ve had to understand that. Even though I’ve been a British politician for 27 years, I certainly don’t have all the answers.

JJ: How did you originally become aware of the Maldives?

RK: Of course I have been aware of the Maldives for many years as a desirable holiday destination – islands in the sun. But it was really the arrival of President Mohamed Nasheed in my constituency office in Salisbury with an agenda of issues for which he needed the assistance of the local member of parliament.

He walked in through the door with his school-friend David Hardingham (Nasheed attended Dauntsey’s school with the founder of the Salisbury-based Friends of Maldives NGO), and said “I have problems. I have problems with visas, I have problems with police, I need some advice from police about how to protect my little office in Salisbury” – all these sorts of issues.

There were bigger problems: such as how to engage the British government ministers and the Commonwealth with what was happening in the Maldives. He quite rightly, as a good democrat, used the democratic system in the UK to pursue answers to his problems.

JJ: This was before the founding of [Nasheed’s] Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP)?

RK: Absolutely. It was when he was setting up the party in a room above a shop in Millford street in Salisbury. That is where he was writing for Minivan News, that is where he was broadcasting on the Internet to Germany, and uplifting the shortwave to the Maldives.

JJ: Can you describe that first meeting?

RK: It was quite an extraordinary meeting. Over my many years I’ve realised you never knew what was going to hit you next as an issue. You never knew who was going to walk through your office door with what sort of problem. It might be a regular sort of problem – housing or taxation – but just sometimes there was an issue that really gripped me as really important. This was one of those.

I saw a young man with great vision and enormous energy and determination, who wanted to change his country. I’d had only one or two similar experiences in Salisbury, with other people who had equally great ambitions, interests and determination, but I recognised this particular young man as someone who I could not ignore, indeed who I wished to promote, because I believed he had all the right instincts as a democrat.

It was an extraordinary impression he made at first. He was very nervous, and very apprehensive. He didn’t know if he could trust me. Trust is the big issue in democratic politics, and I think he had one or two rebuffs from other politicians.

I took it at face value, and we took it from there. I met him a number of times in Salisbury, and I never ceased to believe in his own vision and his motives, and his motives appeared to me to be all correct.

I know nothing about all the party politics of the Maldives, but I do understand a good democrat when I see one.

JJ: What motivated you turn that meeting into a push for democracy in the Maldives? Wasn’t it a far-reaching project for the member for Salisbury?

RK: Not really, because I’d always believed in the Commonwealth and international development issues. I had worked for Chris Patten when he was Secretary of State for International Development, both as his parliamentary secretary and later as a minister, and I understood his view of the world. He left politics to become governor of Hong Kong where he oversaw the hand-over of Hong Kong back to the Chinese government, and I was close to that process.

So I always believed that British politicians had a duty to other Commonwealth countries. And that was why I believed it was more than worthwhile – it was my duty – to assist in this process.

At that stage I knew nothing about the politics of the Maldives – I had no reason to. But if what [Mohamed Nasheed] said was true, he had a strong case.

That was why I needed to take the case to Ministers in the British government, to seek their involvement.

JJ: What was the reaction from British ministers when you presented this story to them?

RK: I think it was always positive, always open-minded, waiting for the evidence to emerge. I think the British government never sought to interfere with political processes, but it did wish to ensure democratic processes were possible in the Maldives.

That was why the Westminster Foundation for Democracy – which is an all-party Foundation – was willing to supply funds and people to advise.

JJ: When did the Westminster Foundation become involved and what support did they provide?

RK: In the year or so before the 2008 presidential election a number of people came out to the Maldives to give advice based on their experience from other parts of the world – the Commonwealth in particular – on what was going on and what was possible. It was completely even-handed and fair-minded, and it was not taking up a party political stance.

JJ: A version of the story told here is that Westminster Foundation funded and trained the MDP.

RK: No no, the Westminster Foundation is completely non party-political. That is why the leaders of all parties are trustees of the Westminster Foundation. It is absolutely not party political. It operates in a whole range of countries, for example Macedonia and other countries of the former Yugoslavia. It acts exactly the same way in any given circumstance anywhere in the world.

JJ: It often stated here that the MDP was strongly supported by the UK Conservative Party. What was the extent of that relationship beyond yourself?

RK: It simply started with me because I was the local MP and happened to be a Conservative. It may equally be true that if it was a Labour Party constituency it might have been the Labour Party that took up the cause. But that wasn’t the issue.

At no stage did I ever discuss party politics with President Mohamed Nasheed. He never asked me anything party-political and I didn’t offer it, any more than I have [during this visit]. I’ve seen both political parties, both party headquarters.

JJ: One of the accusations the former administration threw at both yourself and David Hardingham was that you were Christian missionaries out to subvert Islam in the Maldives. How did you deal with that?

RK: Well I recognised it as a political ploy. But we had to take it seriously as a threat because that was how it was presented – that Salisbury Cathedral might become a target for some kind of activity. It was very specific.

The actual threat was that Salisbury and Salisbury Cathedral were trying to convert the Maldives to Christianity. Which was absolute nonsense but had to be taken seriously, because quite obviously in the Maldives that would be seen as a significant threat in a country that is 100 percent Islamic. I understood that straight away.

It was not true, and therefore we had to say “It is not true.” The Dean of Salisbury Cathedral understood the issue, she took it at face value, and we sought security advice as necessary. But it was never a serious threat. It was a juvenile political ploy.

JJ: Were there any difficulties you faced with the cultural differences of the Maldives? What has your experience been like?

RK: This is my first visit. I was always very keen that people would see my concern for the Maldives as completely impartial and in the interest of good government in the Maldives. That is why I am here, and that is the message I have given to the civil servants I met [on Monday].

The turnout included 14 permanent secretaries – not bad for a retired backbencher. If they are prepared to take me seriously as an impartial supporter of the Maldives, I hope everyone else will.

JJ: What was your reaction when you heard that Mohamed Nasheed had won the 2008 Presidential election?

RK: Astonishment. And delight – in that order. But then I should have recognised that the people are right. As a good democrat I shouldn’t have been surprised. I should have been delighted that he has become President, for the right reasons, doing it the right way, playing it by the rulebook, to make sure his view of good government in the Maldives has prevailed.

He’s now finding out how difficult democracy really is. But that should not deflect him from his vision – of course its difficult, of course the issues are intractable. But, as long as his motives remain completely clear, then I think he will stand again as president, with honour. He clearly has the backing of his party and I wish him well. It’s up to the people of the Maldives.

JJ: Are you aware that when the cabinet resigned Nasheed came under a lot of international pressure for detaining one of the MPs, People’s Alliance (PA) leader Abdulla Yameen, allegedly outside what the constitution permitted?

RK: I’m not aware of that at all. I had just retired [in July 2010], I was away on holiday.

JJ: Have you followed the Maldives since Nasheed’s election? What is your assessment now you’ve seen it first-hand?

RK: I haven’t seen everything, I’ve seen a sample. It’s extremely interesting. I have an agenda of things to go back and do in the UK and contacts to make. I compared notes with the new High commissioner to the Maldives (John Rankin).

I had a fascinating meeting about the importance of statistics to good government. I pointed out that even the British government has only for one year had an independent office of national statistics that everyone can trust – journalists, taxpayers and politicians. And no-one can say “You’re massaging the figures minister” because they are independent.

JJ: Why did this meeting jump out at you?

RK: Because of their anxiety to maintain independence, and their sense of the collective wisdom of the government of the Maldives. In other words, the mark of any good civil service. That was hugely encouraging – their desire not to be party political, or be seen to be party political. All of these are virtuous aspirations on behalf of a civil service determined to serve the people well.

They were asking questions like ‘How do you educate ministers?’ A very important question.

I explained how it worked for me, and how influential civil servants ulitimately are in shaping a government and having limits beyond which they will not go – at which point the cabinet secretary has to see the prime minister to talk about it.

JJ: One of the major economic issues here is that the Maldivian civil service employs a substantial percentage of the population. How do you pare down a civil service while maintaining its integrity and keeping it clear of party politics?

RK: I was asked directly what happens when a government comes in committed to cutting the size of the civil service, and what difference did that make.

I pointed out that is exactly what I had to do during Margaret Thatcher’s government, when as Local Government Minister I was charged with introducing policy that took delivery of public service out of the hands of political and civil servants, and put it in the hands of agencies and contractors, while maintaining services to the public.

It was a painful process – and by and large it worked – but sometimes you had to admit you were wrong. To be able to say, “No, this has failed, stop it and don’t waste any more money. Change the policy.” And that was the advice I gave.

JJ: What reaction did you get whenever you did that?

RK: Huge relief, not least from the Treasury. Because if a policy is not working, it’s wasting money. For example the [UK] poll tax – it was generally recognised politically, but it didn’t work. It was massively expensive, and every time there was another protest, the government had to spend more money to get themselves out of a hole. The only sensible thing to do was put your hands up and say “It hasn’t worked”, and change it. We abolished the poll tax and introduced the council tax in the UK, which is still going strong. Now I can say, “Hey, I got it right.”

JJ: There’s a sense in the Maldives that while everyone agrees on the constitution, not everyone is working in the spirit of it. If you have a situation where the international community is piling on pressure to respect the constitution, how, as a leader and a President, can you work within the boundaries of the constitution when you are dealing with people who may not have its best interests at heart?

RK: I don’t know, because Britain doesn’t have a written constitution. Which is why Britain works!

I have read the Maldivian constitution online, and I recognise some very, very very difficult issues in the constitution which are at loggerheads with the expressed policy of the government over, for example, human rights. Which is very difficult to handle. I don’t know the answer and I’m certainly not going to tell the government how to do it.

But I recognise, and I’m sure they do, that if you have a written constitution, you ought to either abide by it, or change it. But you shouldn’t try to do either too quickly. As I said today, don’t do too much too quickly. Some things you have to do quickly – you have to tell the truth – you have to tell the electorate what your intentions are. But you can’t do it all at once.

It took Margaret Thatcher 11 years to get anywhere near where she wanted to be, before she resigned – or was forced to resign, to be honest.

JJ: In your reading of the Maldivian constitution, what were some of the things that jumped out at you as contradictory to government policy?

RK: I think the clash between human rights and 100 percent Islam is a really difficult issue. I’m a religious person – I therefore respect the Islamic tradition very much, and I’m certainly not trying to convert anyone in the Maldives to Christianity.

But that would be difficult for any government when they are signing up to the UN declarations, which are all about religious freedom and liberty, while at the same time trying to respect a constitution which says “Absolutely not. 100 percent Islam.”

There is a difference in my mind, in my understanding as a Western democrat, that there’s a difference between saying that as a citizen of a country you must belong to a particular faith and, as in Britain, saying: “This is a broadly Christian country, but any other religion is tolerated.”

How you square that circle politically is going to be really difficult to carry out by any government of any complexion, and it’s more likely to take 50 years than five.

JJ: A recurrent observation from the liberal side of debate here is there is a conflict between human rights and Islam. Do you think this then is more a conflict between human rights and the constitution?

RK: No – I think the Maldives will find that it goes through an age of Enlightenment, just as Europe did in the 18th century, when the certainty of a particular interpretation of a particular faith is questioned.

It is not denigrated, it is not abandoned – it is simply talked about. People ask questions. That was the great break in European civilisation – the age of Enlightenment. When science became respectable, when creationism was abandoned, by all but a few.

It didn’t shake the faith, it didn’t abandon the faith, it learned how to question it, and live with the consequences of being a mature democracy. I think the Maldives will go through a similar process.

It will take a long time – if you have a culture which has not been questioning, for hundreds of years, hasn’t seen the need to, and then suddenly the world moves on, that is a big challenge for any government.

JJ: If many of the issues in an emerging democracy will take time to resolve, is there a risk of losing perspective when you are dealing with five year political terms?

RK: Some of the consequential policy changes are going to be difficult if they are done too quickly. But one of the most interesting features of my visit to the Maldives this week has been what is going on in the Middle East and North Africa – and the sense that if the Maldives hadn’t come as far and as fast as it has since the last presidential elections, they may well have found themselves in the situation of one of the North African or Middle Eastern states. Where younger people in particular decided that enough is enough of a particular regime.

The Maldives can hold its head high, and say “We have led the way. We have blazed a trail here in promoting democracy and empowerment of the citizen, with all the difficulties that presents.”

There will be leaders in North Africa who will be wishing they had listened to the Maldives, had done what the Maldives chose to do in 2008.

JJ: What role do think international community can continue to play to ensure the Maldives does see the benefits of democracy?

RK: There is an enormous international role and responsbility. For example in strategic defense planning. The head of military told me about the reorganisation of the military into different heads and commands, and that was an important strategic review that needed to be carried out. It does need to be said that the Maldives’ neighbours, not only India – which is currently providing a helicopter, but the wider international community – should take some responsibility. For example: over this issue of the 37 Somali pirates currently in the Maldives, presenting a huge legal problem for such a small country.

The UN should take the lead in this, and I think there’s a way through this to resolve it internationally. There are other issues of security in the Indian Ocean in terms of everyone’s safety – surveillance of the seas, but also in terms of environmental conservation. I would also like to see the Maldives one day able to lead other emerging democracies down the path of democracy.

JJ: One of the problems civil society organisations have faced here is that because the MDP campaigned strongly on a platform of democracy, freedom of speech, independent media and so forth, suddenly these values and organsiations promoting them have been politicised by association. How does a country separate these values from politics?

RK: It’s not easy, and it takes time, and it’s not the first time this issue has arisen. 10 years ago the Labour Defence Minister asked me to go with him and stand with him in Slovenia in the aftermath of the break-up of Yugoslavia, to convince them that democracy needs an opposition as well as a government – because they were inclined to shoot the opposition.

The Minister took me with him to Slovenia and I sat beside him in a meeting with the group that had obtained the greatest number of votes, and said “Don’t shoot the opposition. You need them to work with you in a democracy.”

Here it is not as extreme. There is not a war in the Malidves. But having talked to both parties I have noticed that there is a very young shoot of democracy here, and it’s going to need time to mature. The political parties are going to both have to see the best in each other and their leaders as well as the worst.

There is no love lost between the political parties here, and in my judgement things that should not be politicised are being politicised. That is the mark of the new democracy. It is a strange idea, it is difficult to handle. But as political thought matures, as the electors get used to democracy, they will encourage their leaders to be more constructive over policy differences. I am not dispirited by this – I think it is competely normal and natural, and part of growing up in a democracy.

We have been at it for a thousand years in England – we take too much for granted. We have politicians slagging each other off, and we yawn. I’m quite sure that is a position people will reach in the Maldives when they want their politicians to get serious about policy issues, and not keep blaming each other for what has happened in the past – and above all, not to seek revenge.

JJ: There is an almost post-apartheid dichotomy between revenge and reconciliation in the Maldives, and a ‘head in the sand’ approach in the hope it will go away. Do you think that is a reasonable position to take, or do old wounds fester and contaminate this discourse you are encouraging?

RK: I think the Maldives should probably seek the advice of Nelson Mandela, who post-apartheid set up the truth commission as a way of learning and forgiving, rather than seeking political revenge. But that is a decision for the Maldivian people – not for me.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

ADK dentist handed to police

A 55 year-old orthodontist at ADK hospital in Male has been handed to police after the discovery that he had fled the US facing charges of child molestation.

According to a 1997 report in the New York Times, Kenneth D’Cunha was accused of fleeing the US to escape charges of involvement in a Manhattan pedophile ring and in particular, the sodomy of three young boys.

“Prosecutors said he was part of a ring of men who gave teen-age boys drugs and cash in exchange for sex. The ring was broken up in 1986. Five members of the ring were found guilty. Mr D’Cunha was charged but fled the country,” the NYT reported.

He was eventually discovered by chance 11 years later working in New Zealand when he sued an employer for wrongful dismissal, and was extradited to the  United States. He appeared in the State Supreme Court of Manhattan and pleaded not guilty, and was eventually released.

ADK Managing Director Ahmed Afal told Haveeru that hospital management had received complaints from staff. The Indian doctor was still in his probationary period and had been cleared by the Maldives Medical Council, Afal said.

Maldivian police said the dentist was being investigated.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Elections Commission suspends funds to ‘inactive’ political parties

The Elections Commission has suspended public funding of six political parties it claims are inactive.

The parties were the Islamic Democratic Party (IDP), the Maldives National Congress (MNC), the Social Liberal Party (SLP), the Maldivian Social Democratic Party (MSDP), the People’s Party (PP), and the Labour Party.

Haveeru reported Deputy Elections Commissioner Ahmed Fayaz Hassan as saying that payments would only be resumed on a court order, or if parties could prove they were politically active.

The budget allocates Rf 13.65 million (US$1.1 million) for the functioning of political parties. Of that money, reported Haveeru, the ruling Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) received (Rf 3.57 million), opposition Dhivehi Rayyithunge Party (DRP) Rf 3.15 million, Adhaalath Party Rf 842,441.62, Jumhoree Party Rf 816,538.47, People’s Alliance (PA) Rf 622,691.85, Gaumee Ithihaadh Party (GIP) Rf 643, 471.30, and Dhivehi Qaumee Party (DQP) Rf 618, 279.78.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Comment: National University could become the engine of national growth and prosperity

One of the most promising aspects for the proponents of democratic change in the Middle East is that the ongoing Arab revolutions are largely being led by youth activists.

Unlike the stereotyped bearded conservatives and liberal communists, the current reform movements in the Arab nations have been fuelled and sustained by the region’s sizeable youth population; a study by the Pew Forum on Religion and Public Life reveals that 60 percent of the Middle East’s population is under the age of 30.

With a median age of just under 25 years, the Maldives also has a very young population that peaked right around the time the country achieved democracy.

Political scientists often tout these statistics as positive indications of a brighter future in these countries.

For a society to be stable, however, they contend that it is necessary to keep this young energy directed and focused on the onerous task of nation building.

One of the long awaited measures towards this end was achieved on the morning of February 15, 2011, when the Maldivian President inaugurated the country’s first National University.

In a country where the educational levels are abysmally low – only one out of five senior secondary students go on to pursue higher education – this comes as welcome news that could aim to reverse that dismal trend.

Traditionally, however, universities have been more than just institutions of learning.

In countries like Turkey, Egypt and Iran, universities have also been centres of intellectual and political activism and indeed, factories of social change.

Student unions in Eastern Europe were the focal points around which the various colour revolutions would coalesce and result in the fall of deep rooted communist regimes.

Universities have also been a hotbed of political activism in Iran, where student bodies participated in the ‘Islamic Revolution’ that dethroned the Shah and installed the Ayatollah in power. Decades later, it was once again university students that would form the core of the ‘Green Movement’, which has in recent years taken to the streets demanding democratic reform.

In the United States, a country with one of the most deeply entrenched university cultures, there has been an interesting historical trend of political ideology and beliefs on university campuses exhibiting marked departures from mainstream public views. Thus, universities have been the flashpoints of major anti-war rallies and liberal activism.

At various points of history, governments have tried to exercise control over universities and dictate the course of their youthful idealism.

One famous example is that of Nazi Germany, where the state apparatus removed books by Jewish authors, communists and other critics from the universities libraries, and burnt them in public squares.

Intellectuals, including the celebrated scientist Albert Einstein, were expelled from universities under German Law, and the Nazi Propaganda Minister Joseph Goebbels famously proclaimed in 1933, “Jewish intellectualism is dead”.

However, history records that Einstein would move to the United States, publish over 300 scientific papers, and spur the top secret Manhattan Project that would soon make America the world’s first nuclear nation.

A little over a decade after Goebbels’ proclamation, the book burning Nazi Germany would face an ignominious defeat, and Einstein’s adopted home would reign for decades as the world’s leading scientific, economic and political superpower.

The temptation to assert ideological control over universities has also seen unpleasant consequences in other countries like Egypt and China.

It is heartening, therefore, to see even conservative politicians like former State Minister of Islamic Affairs, Mohamed Shaheem Ali Saeed, propose that the Maldives National University should offer courses in comparative religious studies and theology – ie, study of religions other than Islam.

The traditionally isolated Maldivian has at many points struggled to deal with foreign ideas, often resulting in potentially xenophobic tendencies.

In November 2008, owners of a local water bottling plant were forced to issue a statement following controversy over the discovery of a ‘cross shape’ on the caps of the water bottles. The culprit turned out to be a faulty machine part that could not be repaired locally. Nevertheless, the company had to sand-paper the offending shape into something less controversial.

In September 2010, an Indian teacher in Foakaidhoo, Shaviyani Atoll, was reportedly tied up and forced off an island after “devout Muslim” parents mistook a compass design drawn on a blackboard for a crucifix.

Courses like Comparative Religious studies could indeed introduce diversity of thought and foster greater mainstream public enlightenment about other belief systems and cultures, which in turn would undoubtedly have a lasting effect on broader concepts of social tolerance.

One must also note the role of universities in revolutionising technology and lifestyles.

From ground breaking medical research to increasing our understanding of life and the cosmos, the thousands of academic papers published annually in leading universities have made invaluable contributions.

Innovative multi-billion dollar corporations like Google, Yahoo and Sun Microsystems have emerged from the laboratories of Stanford University, while Columbia University alone has produced nearly a hundred Nobel Laureates.

Dozens of world leaders from Margaret Thatcher to Indira Gandhi, have emerged from Oxford University, whereas Cambridge University has given the world Isaac Newton, Neils Bohr and Stephen Hawking. The first computer was invented within its walls, as was the revolutionary double helical model of DNA.

Student athletes trained in University gymnasiums have racked up scores of Olympic sports medals, whereas some of the biggest bands in the music industry have at some point shared dorm rooms while living on campus.

In every field of progress, universities and academics have traditionally been a few steps ahead of mainstream society and making giant strides into the future.

Some might be sceptical that a university in the Maldives, without the luxury of a self-contained campus or an atmosphere of academic seclusion, or even a sizeable student or faculty body can quite leave a comparable footprint on the national intellect or society, as is visible in so many other countries.

During the inauguration, however, the Maldivian President recognised the role of universities in upholding democracy and freedom of expression, and the Chancellor of the newly instituted University, former Education Minister Dr Musthafa Luthfy has promised to follow in the illustrious traditions of Oxford.

As Chancellor, he has the monumental task of directing the youth’s energy into strong intellectual and academic pursuits and to nurture a conducive, stimulating environment in which such pursuits can be undertaken without undue political control and societal intimidation – with full intellectual freedom of thought and expression; an atmosphere of research, curiosity, questioning and free inquiry that are crucial to keep the flames of intellectualism burning bright.

As a country that has only recently tasted democratic freedoms, the Maldives counts on its first National University to produce the future leadership and become engine of national growth and prosperity, while simultaneously charting the country’s destiny.

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)

MDP could win an election “blindfolded”, gloats Nasheed

The ruling party’s election success in population hubs across the country gave “a clear indication of the current political situation”, President Mohamed Nasheed said during a party rally at the Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP)’s Haruge.

“The government received huge support in some of the small populations. We need to consider the results of the election in several ways. This election is not about the amount of seats,” Haveeru reported Nasheed as saying.

“If we are able to do it [win elections] blindfolded I don’t see any reason why I can’t contest in 2013. It’s fortunate that the constitution limits the presidential terms to two,” he added in an apparent attempt to bait the opposition, today troubled by factional infighting.

According to Haveeru a jubilant Nasheed also criticised the campaigns of the opposition parties, as well as coalition party Adhaalath, saying he was “surprised that I couldn’t see anyone voting for Adhaalath Party except from Kinolhas (Raa Atoll). I did not see any party carrying out a good campaign except the MDP.”

The DRP has claimed victory in the local council elections citing a seat majority of 502 across island and atoll councils, to the MDP’s 375. The MDP has claimed victory because it won almost all the population hubs in the country, which could swing the popular vote in its favour.

The Elections Commission said this morning that it was still calculating the popular vote, which will give a percentage figure of support for each party.

This will provide a clearer indication of the election result than seat count or raw ballots, both because of the divide in DRP votes due to an ongoing factional split, and the ‘multiple’ votes made for island and atoll councils.

One senior figure in the MDP said the party’s preliminary calculations had pegged the result somewhere between 45-50% for the MDP and low 40s for the opposition – which would be a significant jump in support for the ruling party following the parliamentary election. However the source said the figure would be difficult to calculate with any accuracy until the Elections Commission provided voter turnout data.

Leader of the Labour Party Ahmed ‘Redwave’ Saleem, an MDP coalition partner, has meanwhile been quoted from a press statement as calling for Nasheed to resign from office and “hand over the presidency to a more qualified and responsible person.”

Saleem contends that the government misused state assets to conduct its campaign in the lead-up to the Local Council Elections, which saw President Nasheed visiting over 100 islands and giving 130 speeches.

The President’s Press Secretary Mohamed Zuhair told Haveeru yesterday that the President had worn through three pairs of shoes during the campaign, and was now on a four-day break.

Opposition leader Ahmed Thasmeen Ali meanwhile told Minivan News yesterday that the priority was to ensure that successful candidates from all sides were aware of their new responsbilities.

“It is a fact that candidates from many parties including ours may not be clear on their responsibilities and mandates,” Thasmeen said.

“We don’t have any details on when the local councils will begin their work, and there are many issues that need to be finalised. For example, how will these councils interact with the government?”

Parties across the political spectrum would be required to provide “support structures” such as technical training to try prepare individual council members for decentralised governance, he added.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

DRP wins seat majority, MDP cities in first local council election

The first local council election to be held in the Maldives has concluded with a clear seat majority for the opposition Dhivehi Rayyithunge Party (DRP) across islands and atolls, however the ruling Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) took the majority of seats for almost every major population centre.

Preliminary results show that MDP holds all but two council seats in Male’ and every seat in Addu, where an election was cleared to proceed after a last-minute Supreme Court decision the day before. Together these areas account for around 40 percent of the voting population of the Maldives.

As a result, both parties celebrated election victories in Male’ yesterday evening, with former President Maumoon Abdul Gayoom headlining a “Welcome to Blue Maldives” rally at the artificial beach, while jubilant MDP supporters crowded into pickup trucks bedecked with yellow balloons, and drove around Male’ cheering before attending a rally at the MDP Haruge.

The Elections Commission (EC) is currently collating the results and should have final counts by 6pm this evening, which will allow an analysis of party preferences on a per-voter basis – a key indicator for the 2013 Presidential election. This is misleading to do with the raw ballot count, as those outside Male’ and Addu effectively voted twice – once for island council, once for atoll council.

Vice President of the Elections Commission, Ahmed Hassan Fayaz, said preliminary figures showed a 70 percent voter turnout across the country. Minivan News attended several polling stations across Male’ and noted the atmosphere to be orderly, cheerful and professional.

The EC has declared the elections free and fair, although it has acknowledged the validity of many complaints.

“There were some complaints of election observers campaigning [at the ballot box], and there were also complaints that even some election officials were showing an inclination towards a particular party,” Fayaz said.

Elections Commissioner Fuad Thaufeeq acknowledged to newspaper Haveeru that while the commission had searched for impartial elections officials, “we were not able to find the required amount of officials who do not belong to a political party.”

He also confirmed that the commission was investigating reports that officials had been threatened at some polling stations by elections observers, in an effort to influence the election.

Such incidents were sporadic, Fayaz said, however across the country the commission grappled with disgruntled ‘assistant’ voters, mostly friends and family members seeking to accompany elderly voters to the ballot box.

“We decided that only those who legally required assistance would be permitted to vote in this way, and that became a big issue,” Fayaz said.

“The problem is that the law says [votes can be assisted] only when a person has an illness or physical disability that leaves unable to use their hands. The culture and the practice has been for elderly voters to be assisted by friends and family, but this time we said no. It caused complaints because in the past people have been able to vote like this.”

Major disruption occurred on Kelaa in Haa Alif Atoll, an island of approximately 2200 people, when clashes between islanders, police and election officials forced authorities to evacuate the ballot box to Hanimadhoo.

“Officials were a little slow with the voting and as result of several small hiccups, we heard that there were too many people still waiting to vote (by the 4pm deadline),” Fayaz said.

“We said we did not mind if they stayed open until 8pm or even 10pm so that everybody could vote, but [the situation escalated]. I think one of the reasons was that the officials were not experienced in dealing with such situations,” he said.

Reports in Haveeru suggested that over 600 people may have been unable to vote after the polls closed on the island. Fayaz said the EC had counted the Kelaa votes and recorded interim results.

“So far we have not decided to hold a re-election, but we are ready to do so if a court rules this is required,” he said.

Election observers from the Commonwealth Secretariat are preparing a report on the election.

Political Affairs Officer Alison Pearman said she was unable to comment on the election as it was outside the mandate of the small team of observers, but said the report for the Secretary General would likely be passed to the Elections Commission.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Local Council Elections: Day 2

The opposition Dhivehi Rayyithunge Party (DRP) took the lead in the local council elections this morning, as ballot boxes across the islands were tallied overnight. However the ruling Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) appear to have decisively won both Male’ and Addu City Councils, taking all but two seats in the former and every seat in Addu.

Police reported that incidents were generally minor and restricted to isolated outbursts on several islands due to the prevalence of ‘assisted’ voting for the elderly and blind. An exception was on Kela in Haa Alif Atoll, where police had to last night evacuate election officials and the ballot box to Hanimaadhoo before controlling a irate crowd.

“There was a misunderstanding between the Elections Commission and the people voting,” said Sub-Inspector Ahmed Shiyam. “Some people may have gone there after the 4pm deadline and found they were unable to vote.”

Both major parties have expressed concern with the low voter turnout, while the DRP yesterday expressed particular frustration with the Elections Commission’s last minute decision to reallow an election for Addu City Council, following Supreme Court permission. Leader Ahmed Thasmeen Ali told Minivan News that the party has dissassembled its campaign team in Addu after the EC cancelled the election.

10:50 – Two-thirds of the ballot boxes (276) have been counted so far, with 141 remaining to be counted. Current tally:

DRP 375
MDP 343
Independent 132
JP 9
DQP 2
AP 10
GIP 1

12:50 – Haveeru reports issues with the ballot box on Baarah in Haa Alif Atoll, delaying preliminary results for the island.

Elections Commission Deputy President Ahmed Fayaz told Minivan News that many such issues had been reported to the Commission.

”The commission’s officials have been working since dawn yesterday, and it is possible for them to make mistakes,” he said. ”We have now sent a team to the island to resolve the issue.”

13:19 – DRP pulls further ahead as island votes come in, although vote % won’t be available until later in the day.

Of 288 boxes counted, 129 to go:

DRP 402
MDP 359
Independent 140
AP 10
JP 9
DQP 9
PA 2
GIP 1

2:15pm – Votes for Baarah are being recounted due to a mismatch between the number of ballots and votes cast, reports Haveeru. The Kela ballot box is currently being recounted, amid reports that over 600 people on the island may have been unable to vote due to deadline policies.

16:35 – Both major parties seem to have declared victory. Former DRP Deputy Leader Umar Naseer has passed around an SMS invitation declaring that a “Welcome to Blue Maldives” victory function, organised by former President Maumoon Abdul Gayoom, will be held at the Artificial Beach in Male’ at 8:45pm this evening.

Meanwhile, jubilant MDP supporters have crowded into pickup trucks and are parading the city hooting and cheering.

17:15 – Preliminary results of 307 boxes counted:

DRP 440
MDP 369
Independent 153
AP 13
JP 9
DQP 3
PA 2
GIP 1

17:17 – The Elections Commission has said it may call a re-election in Kela after violence erupted last night when voting was closed. Haveeru reports that over 600 people were unable to vote by the deadline.

18:12 – Elections Commission confirms that temporary counts for almost all boxes have been completed across 188 islands and 400 polling stations, and are currently being faxed and emailed through to the EC to be tabulated.

Deputy Commissioner Ahmed Hassan Fayaz told Minivan News that the final results should be received around 11pm this evening, “although changes to the temporary results should be minor.”

“The temporary results suggest that MDP has won more seats in the city councils, while DRP has a clear majority in the island and atoll councils,” Fayaz said.

The percentage vote tally, rather than seat count, should be available later this evening or early tomorrow morning once tabulation is complete, which will give some insight into support for the major parties.

18:34 – Latest count:

DRP 449
MDP 381
Independent 164
AP 13
JP 8
DQP 4
PA 2
GIP 1

Rolling coverage will continue today until votes have been counted. Refresh the page for updates.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Complex election and “appallingly low” voter education could mean many invalid ballots

Local NGO Transparency Maldives (TM) has expressed “deep concern” at low levels of voter education and “backtracking of transparency standards” set by the Elections Commission after previous elections.

“Appallingly low levels of voter education combined with persistent media bias/propaganda, use of state resources by the ruling party, and backtracking of transparency and accessibility standards previously set by the interim Elections Commission in the presidential and parliamentary elections are issues of concern,” the NGO said.

TM is coordinating the national domestic observation of the local council elections, covering Male’, Hulhumale’, Villingili and 38 other islands across 14 atolls. Together with 20 partner NGOs, the observers will cover two-thirds of the country’s ballot boxes.

The TM team will also be scrutinising three main TV stations, four radio stations and three print media “for bias, objectivity and quality of reporting during the election.”

In a pre-election statement, the NGO commented that “an environment of mistrust between the election administration, the government, political parties, candidates and the media has contributed to a decline of trust in electoral systems.”

“Given the complexity of the election and the low level of voter education, Transparency Maldives anticipates a high percentage of invalid ballots. Transparency Maldives also believes that this will contribute to raising tensions as the margin for winning and losing will be low due to the small number of eligible voters spread over a high number of candidates.”

™ however commended the EC for “spearheading a meaningful, although a limited and delayed, voter education program in Male’ and the atolls.”

“Transparency Maldives also appreciates the readiness of the Elections Commission in preparing for the Election Day.”

A small team of international observers from the Commonwealth are also present in the Maldives, but are not formally monitoring the election.

“We don’t normally observe local council elections, but the Elections Commission asked us. We’re not formally monitoring the election – we won’t be doing press releases or making public announcements, but we will produce a report for the Commonwealth Secretary General and this will like by passed to the Elections Commission,” explained Alison Pearman, Policy Officer with the Political Affairs Division of the Commonwealth Secretariat.

Besides Pearman, the Commonwealth team includes Commissioner Florence Kebbie (National Election Commission of Sierra Leone), Zenaida Moya-Flowers (Chairperson of the Commonwealth Local Government Forum and Mayor, Belize City Council), Anuya Kuwar (Project Officer – Asia region, Commonwealth Local Government Forum).

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)