Tag: vote

Legal confusion over local council elections

The government claims to be seeking legal advice concerning issues relating to the local council elections scheduled for October.

The President’s Press Secretary Mohamed Zuhair said there were contradictory definitions mentioned in the decentralisation and local council acts.

For instance, Hulhudhoo and Meedhu in Addu Atoll are considered two different islands and have their own island offices, but both are located on the same land mass.  Under the decentralisation act,  two islands on the same land or in the same lagoon would be considered one island, Zuhair explained.

“But in the local council elections act island offices are [allocated] for every island. As a result, it is now difficult to determine on which islands councils should be established,’’ he said.

Zuhair said the Elections Commission [EC] would try to hold elections on time, regardless to the issues raised.

Dhivehi Rayyithunge Party DRP MP Abdulla Mausoom said DRP has already presented a bill to the parliament to resolve the issue.

”We will amend the law to provide power to the citizens, and we might as well amend the constitution if necessary,” said Mausoom. ”In the bill it will determine how the local councils should be established in the controversial islands of Addu Atoll and Fuvamulah.”

In May, the parliament passed legislation on local council elections. The bill was initially passed in such a way that any person who lived out of their birthplace was required to travel to their home island.

Article 4 of the first legislation passed said voters would have to be present in their island of birth or registered constituency in order to cast their ballots.

President Mohamed Nasheed vetoed the bill, claiming a large number of people from the atolls living in Male’ or “40 per cent of the population”, would be deprived of the right to vote if he ratified the bill.

President of the Elections Commission Fuad Thaufeeq did not respond to Minivan News at time of press.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

President to veto local council elections bill

President Mohamed Nasheed has announced that he will veto the bill on local council elections voted through by parliament earlier this week.

Speaking at a ruling Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) rally last night, President Nasheed said ratifying the bill on decentralisation would be “the intelligent thing to do” but article four of the local council elections bill would deprive many citizens of their right to vote.

Article four requires that voters would have to be present in their island of birth or registered constituency in order to cast their ballots.

The bill was voted through by the opposition Dhivehi Rayyithunge Party (DRP)-People’s Alliance coalition without any votes from MDP MPs.

The president said a large number of people from the atolls living in Male’ or “40 per cent of the population”, would be deprived of the right to vote if he ratified the bill.

Moreover, he said, young men and women who work outside their islands would not have a say in local government.

He added that the bill was “definitely unconstitutional”.

In the 2008 presidential elections, said Nasheed, MDP received the majority of its backing from islanders living in Male’.

President Nasheed accused opposition MPs of employing “trickery and deceit” during the last session of parliament.

“50,000 people will vote for MDP. This is a cunning plan to deprive them of their vote,” he said.

Shifting blame

The two main political parties have  blamed each other for the controversial article four.

Two amendments proposed by the MDP to allow remote voting were defeated in parliament on Sunday.

”We proposed to amend the bill in a manner everyone can vote for,” said MDP MP Eva Abdulla. “But DRP MPs did not vote for it.”‘

Eva said then MDP then proposed another amendment to allow people of other islands living in Male’ to vote in the council elections “but they refused for that also”.

”There are more than 20 percent of each islands population who are from other islands,” she said.

DRP MP Ahmed Nihan said that DRP MPs did not vote for the amendments because it did not provide the right to vote for everyone equally.

“‘One amendment allowed voting for people living in Male’ who had left their birth place, which is not fair,” Nihan said. “The other reason why we did not vote for the amendments is during the meeting held with political parties and the Elections Commission (EC), DRP objected to article four, but everyone else supported so we also agreed.”

Apart from DRP, said Nihan, MDP and MPs of the Dhivehi Qaumee Party participated in the meeting with the EC.

”The EC said that it would be difficult for them to keep ballot boxes everywhere and said they had financial difficulties too,” he said. “But we said it should be like any other elections, and the EC said that it was different from presidential elections and parliamentary elections and also said that it was the way they do it in other countries as well.”

He said that the ruling party was trying to “mislead people”.

”DRP had confirmed that we will present amendments to that bill and try to keep ballot boxes in other countries where Maldivians live,” he said.

But, MDP MP Mohamed Hamza dismissed Nihan’s claims as “all lies”.

”We presented two amendments, first one to at least allow people from islands living Male’ to vote,” Hamza said, ”the second one to hold the elections as widely as the elections commission could,”

He said that DRP MPs rejected both even though they understood it would deprive people of the right to vote.

DRP MP Ahmed Mahloof said the DRP raised the problem at the meeting with the EC and warned that article four would “become an issue”.

”[But] the EC wanted to make it different from other elections,” he said.

Mahlouf said President Nasheed was unhappy that the bill states all appointed island and atoll councilors should be dismissed.

“We want as many people to take part in the vote,” he said.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Comment: Why some people like DRP and hate the MDP

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

  • Direct beneficiary of DRP in power:

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

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

  • Democracy ain’t so hot after all:

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

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

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

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

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

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

  • MDP are incompetent:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

  • The MDP leadership is dictatorial and undemocratic themselves:

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

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

  • The MDP philosophy is wrong:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)