Quote of the day

The language of a captive community acquires certain durable habits; whole zones of reality cease to exist simply because they have no name

Syndicate content

Columns

Paul Rogers

Global security


Li Datong

China from the inside


Fred Halliday

Global politics


Mary Kaldor

Human security


Daniele Archibugi

Cosmopolitan democracy

Email & RSS

Sign up to oD's editorial summaries email:


Enter your Email


Powered by FeedBlitz


Follow oD on Twitter:


Join our Facebook group:
Add oD to your Netvibes: Add to Netvibes

Demotix witness*upload*share

Recent comments

Navigation


View 5 comments

The Maldives: a democratic revolution

Judith Evans, 31 - 10 - 2008
The people of the Indian Ocean island-state have written a fresh chapter in the history of their country and even of democracy itself, says Judith Evans. 

The citizens of the tiny Indian Ocean nation of the Maldives witnessed an extraordinary moment on 29 October 2008. A live broadcast on state television depicted the autocratic president who had ruled the country since 1978 standing beside his greatest political rival - and acknowledging his defeat in the just-concluded two-round election.

Judith Evans is editor of the Maldives-based national news website MinivanNews, which covers politics and general news in English for a local and international audienceThe scene in the opulent president's office was at once riveting and surreal. Maumoon Abdul Gayoom, after all, had been prepared for many years to use state power to repress opposition and crush dissent; yet here was the 71-year-old leader telling the nation: "I accept the will of the people. I have conceded the elections." Alongside was the 41-year-old Mohamed Nasheed, who had spent a significant period of his adult life as a political prisoner only to emerge as the principal challenger to Gayoom - and ultimately the victor in the country's first-ever multi-candidate presidential election.  

The spirit of reconciliation was almost as astonishing as the fact of the meeting itself. Here was Gayoom bowing out with more dignity than he had shown throughout much of his long reign; here was Nasheed, a compelling figure who had become the international face of the Maldives's reform movement, saying he would not take action against the man whose security forces have tortured him, fed him ground glass and kept him in solitary confinement for as long as eighteen months at a stretch. "He is going to be staying with us. I don't think we should be going for a witch-hunt and digging up the past", said the man widely known as "Anni".

A democratic election in an authoritarian state, followed by a peaceful acceptance of the opposition's victory, is rare enough - and enough of a contrast with the experience of so many countries around the world, from Burma to Zimbabwe - as to be a cause for celebration. The always overplayed image of a Maldives paradise has for once acquired reality - and in politics rather in the tourist brochures.

After this shining moment, the deeper social problems that are part of the legacy of Maumoon Abdul Gayoom's years in power will take a long time to overcome. Now, however, the experience of this democratic election - and the signals of a peaceful transition of power - have created a precedent that will surely be of immense value to the Maldives's future.

From Angola to Zimbabwe, Armenia to Spain, openDemocracy authors assess the outcome of elections around the world in 2008:

Irfan Husain, "Pakistan's judgment day" (22 January 2008)

James Ker-Lindsay, " Cyprus: walk, don't run" (22 February 2008)

Gérard Prunier, "Kenya: histories of hidden war" (29 February 2008)

Andrew Wilson, "Russia's post-election balance" (3 March 2008)

Armine Ishkanian, "Democracy contested: Armenia's fifth presidential elections" (4 March 2008)

Ivan Briscoe, "From the shadows: Spain's election lessons" (10 March 2008)

Robert Parsons, "Georgia's dangerous gulf" (30 May 2008)

Roger Southall, "The politics of pressure: the world and Zimbabwe" (26 June 2008)

John Crabtree, "Bolivia: democratic tides" (2 July 2008)

Lara Pawson, "Angola's elections: the politics of no change" (23 September 2008)

Guy Hedgecoe, "Ecuador's hyper-political wave" (30 September 2008)

Natalia Leshchenko, "Belarus's election paradox" (1 October 2008)

Anton Pelinka, "Austria's democratic wound" (2 October 2008)
The road to vote

The election itself was the culmination of a five-year democratic-reform process, in which Maldivians had taken to the streets to protest against the tight control held by President Gayoom and his Dhivehi Raiyyithunge Party (DRP) allies over every government institution. Their efforts and sacrifices were vital in securing a new constitution, ratified on 7 August 2008, which introduced a raft of reforms that included a separation of powers, independent commissions, and a bill of rights.

At the time of the document's ratification, many doubted that the Maldives government was - after many years of one-candidate referenda to secure another term for the president - prepared to oversee a genuinely democratic election. Gayoom had repeatedly pledged to hold elections before the end of his sixth presidential term on 11 November 2008, and 7 August was the latest possible date they could take place under the new constitution. The tight timetable confirmed suspicions of an impending "fix". In the rushed pre-election period, voter-education programmes were compressed into three weeks, as the newly independent elections commission scrambled to work with an outdated and heavily flawed voter-list. All the while, the government retained control of state media.

The concerns persisted during the campaign, where six candidates (including Gayoom and Nasheed) were registered to run for the presidency. To many veterans of the Maldives's political scene, the conditions were all-too-reminiscent of the one-candidate "elections" of the past; one contender, Ibrahim Ismail, warned that if results did not go Gayoom's way, he might "do a Mugabe".

Indeed, during the first round of voting, which took place on 8 October, widespread problems with voter-registration almost stopped the polls. Thousands of would-be voters - the exact number has not been confirmed - found themselves missing from the voter-list, sparking protests amid pouring rain outside the central counting-station in the capital, Malé. The elections commission almost affirmed its newly independent status by choosing to postpone the vote.

There were also gathering reports of misconduct, mainly by the government side. The opposition media reported large-scale bribery efforts, with 500 Maldivian Rufiyaa ($39) said to be the routine "price" for a vote. An entrenched network of island and atoll chiefs - powerful local-government figures, all appointed by Gayoom under the old constitution - was said to be threatening civil servants with job losses if they failed to back the president's campaign. There were also fears that in overcrowded Malé, powerful street-gangs - reinforced by the release from police custody of leaders and murder-suspects - were being primed to help secure the "right" result.

In the event, the first-round vote went ahead, with Nasheed - conscious of the impending end of Gayoom's term, and perhaps scenting victory even at that stage - urging the commission and other candidates to continue the process. The outcome was an ad-hoc registration system that (according to a Commonwealth observation mission) "compromised some aspects of the election". The Commonwealth team in addition noted allegations of bribery, patronage, low-level violence and government influence; but it found that the polls were "credible overall" and had "met many of the benchmarks for democratic elections to which Maldives has committed itself".

A time to breathe

The first-round results reduced the field from six to two: since the president was denied an absolute majority, the top two vote-winners - arch-rivals Gayoom (with 40%) and Nasheed (25%) went through to a second round on 28 October.

In the interim, an already bitter government campaign intensified, with Gayoom accusing his rival of breaching political taboos such as spreading Christianity and seeking to legalise cannabis. On the other side, the defeated first-round candidates rallied to back Nasheed, whose Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) campaigned under the potent slogan Aneh Dhivehi Raajje ("The Other Maldives"). Yet on 28 October, the second round proceeded with an almost eerie calm in Malé. The voting queues were short, and voters tranquil if apprehensive about the results. "It might be fair and smooth, but there might be a big fight also", said 21-year-old finance secretary Mariyam Mohamed as she waited to cast her ballot.

The fears proved unjustified. "There are the normal shortcomings with the voter list, but it doesn't appear that this was deliberately initiated by somebody", said a diplomatic observer during the poll. "Standards are much better than last time."

When the results were announced by the election commission in the early hours of 29 October, "Anni" - in an impressive turnout of 86% - had received 53.65% - a narrow but clear victory.

At this point, many Maldivians and foreign onlookers held their breath. Gayoom, after all, had imposed a state of emergency in 2004 when the Maldives's first wave of street protests - sparked by the death of a prisoner, Evan Naseem, in custody in 2003 - escalated. There was tension amid the calm: an opposition leader said that the police and army had indicated they would not back a new crackdown, and rumours of a backstage deal between Gayoom and Nasheed circulated.

Then, in the early morning of 29 October, Gayoom made a short announcement on state radio: "Beloved Maldivians...I accept the results of the 28 October runoff election, and I respectfully congratulate Mr Mohamed Nasheed and his party". Asia's longest-serving head of state was, after all, ready to stand down.

Maldivians could at last breathe out. The public reaction to Anni's win was euphoric. In Malé, thousands gathered to greet the dawn while singing campaign-songs and hugging one another. Even Gayoom's supporters in the streets seemed sanguine: "I don't support this but I think it is ok", said 36-year-old Khadeeja Mohamed."I'm not surprised".

The legacy and the future

After the party, the hangover? Mohamed Nasheed certainly has a tough inheritance. The Maldives - whose 300,000 inhabitants are spread across 200 far-flung inhabited coral islands - has endemic social problems: it may be south Asia's richest nation by GDP per capita (a statistic much proclaimed by Gayoom), but 30% of children are malnourished, 40% of people live on less than $2 a day, and a growing heroin epidemic consumes the lives of many teenagers.

The country has also slid down the international-corruption rankings, amid many complaints about government nepotism. The political tensions of recent years have acquired a religious and violent aspect, with a homegrown Islamist movement mounting a terrorist attack in September 2008 which injured twelve tourists. Even more fundamental is the existential threat of climate change, which makes the Maldives one of the most vulnerable nations on the planet.

How will Mohamed Nasheed cope? His testing political experience will be a huge asset: this England-educated son of a privileged family who chose to live in the packed heart of Malé has been at the forefront of the drive for change. He has battled Gayoom's government single-mindedly, heading street-protests and undergoing spells in jail, whilst simultaneously courting international diplomats and building the structures of the country's first political party, the MDP.

Now, after the move from prison to presidency, he must work with the diverse opposition alliance that was brought together for the purpose of fighting the elections in a context where the DRP (at least until the elections scheduled for February 2009) has a majority of seats in parliament. This will mean negotiating both with his own side and with his defeated opponents, while ruling an economically vulnerable nation with sky-high expectations of a new government. It will not be easy.

Moreover, the preconditions of oppression remain in the background. The Maldives was for centuries a sultanate, then a British protectorate until 1965; it became a republic only in 1968, and its two presidents since then have shown little difference from the sultans in their style of rule.

But the election also shows that the citizens of the Maldives are no longer prepared to accept rule by sultan-presidents. A generation forged by the protests of the early 2000s have used new technologies (such as mobile-phone networks) to share information about human-rights abuse, organise campaigns, break through social barriers, and challenge the powerful. They will not easily be subjugated.

This landmark election gives a new face to a country known to much of the world (if at all) for its tourist industry, its global-warming vulnerability - and its long dictatorship. Now it is striking out on a fresh course; and perhaps along the way setting a standard for many Islamic nations, with lessons for others besides.

The people of the Maldives have written a new chapter in their country's history, and even in the history of democracy. "Can you think of anywhere else it has happened - a dictator stepping down with dignity after a free election?" said one observer, who asked not to be named.  "I can't". Whatever happens from here, it is for the Maldives a proud and unforgettable moment.

Average rating
(1 vote)

Please support openDemocracy's "Needed: more democracy!" campaign.

We need more of our readers to support the work of helping spread democratic understanding and influence.

If you read openDemocracy and value it please DONATE:

Donate from the UK with Gift Aid

Donate from any other country

Donate via PayPal

read on

MaldivianNews

Maldives - election commission

Maldives - president's office

Maldives Culture

Asian Centre for Human Rights - Maldives

Friends of Maldives

 
This article is published by Judith Evans, and openDemocracy.net under a Creative Commons licence. You may republish it without needing further permission, with attribution for non-commercial purposes following these guidelines. These rules apply to one-off or infrequent use. For all re-print, syndication and educational use please see read our republishing guidelines or contact us. Some articles on this site are published under different terms. No images on the site or in articles may be re-used without permission unless specifically licensed under Creative Commons.
NewsCredit This article adheres to the openDemocracy.net principles.

Comments


Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

hussen (not verified) said:



Mon, 2008-11-03 20:37

accurate information... been reading many about the election but none even as close to accuracy as this particular article.

Good Work!!

Editor Maldives... said:



Mon, 2008-11-03 09:36

You have gone to gratuitous lengths to draw unqualified parallels between the Maldives’ republican rulers and its previous monarchs.  The immediate royal predecessors of the Maldive republican rulers did not wield absolute power. The two sultans who acceded to the throne since the first Maldive constitution of 1932 ruled every bit like constitutional monarchs, such as those of the United Kingdom. Sultan Hassan Nooreddine II ruled on the advice of his ministers and abdicated of his own accord and lived in Male with dignity until he died 22 years later. Sultan Mohamed Farid was a constitutional monarch to the letter. He oversaw the resignation of his first Prime Minister Ibrahim Ali Didi who faced a parliamentary vote of no confidence, and appointed Didi’s deputy Ibrahim Nasir as prime minister on the advice of parliament.  Ibrahim Didi was able to live in Male with dignity until his death. Mohamed Farid’s reign lapsed when the Maldives became a republic in 1968 but lived with dignity in his two private residences until he died 6 months later. 

In 1978 when Maumoon Abdul Gayoom was elected to the presidency of the republic, many people, both at home and abroad, heralded it as the dawning of a new democratic age for the Maldives.  Mr Gayoom was received in the West, until relatively recently, as a person committed to the cause of modernism and was credited with “opening-up” the Maldives. The United Kingdom even awarded him the Grand Cross of the Order of St Michael and St George.  

A fact worth noting that you have omitted is that the recently ratified constitution of the Maldives falls well short of democracy. It denies ultimate power to the people or their elected representatives by subordinating statute law to Islamic religious law. Since the constitution came into effect, a political party in the Maldives has been talking of “appealing” one of the first rulings of the Maldives Supreme Court to a fetwa-issuing body based in Arabia. If the appeal goes through it will be unprecedented. There is no indication that the new leadership to be sworn in will change things. President-elect of the Republic Mr Nasheed heads a party, like Mr Gayoom’s, that has a written commitment to persecuting non-Muslims, in flagrant violation of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, of which the Maldives is a state party since before the new constitution.

 

www.maldivesroyalfamily.com

Saywhynot (not verified) said:



Sat, 2008-11-01 18:35

I do not agree totally with the author as there are absurd lies in the article. To pint a few, I would say that the children are not malnourished and Maldives would be one of the few in Asia having a healthy lot of children. The author wants to paint a bleak picture on the past regime but it would be unethical if the truth is concealed. And the change of regime is not enough to show the world that Maldives have made a better choice, unless we make sound improvements on social problems prevailing in the country.

Aminath Sudha (not verified) said:



Sat, 2008-11-01 15:50

This article i belive is a very clear picture of what happened in Maldives. I believe what happened in Maldives is least likely to happen in any country, where it has been long ruled by a system like this. i am person who has always believed Maldives deserved better than this, and been observing the poltical situation of Maldives,, and infact a great admirere of Anni and his work. I believe Maldives is very proud of this young man, who is a very chraesmatic leader. We all have new hopes, and we believe that this change is for better, and in the years ahead, it will be a new Maldives, with many of our dreams becoming a reality.

Mohamed Amir (not verified) said:



Sat, 2008-11-01 15:04

It is not surprising why Gayoom accepted defeat so graciously. First he never thought he was going to see this result. So he never prepared himself to run away despite advice from his family. Now he is grounded and we will ensure the families who suffered under his regime are given a chance to seek justice.

The success of this election is no doubt due to the people of Maldives. But there are three names I would like to mention who made significant contributions. Ahmed Moosa (Saape) Editor in chief of Dhivehi Observer. Ismail Saadiq (Chairman of Maldives League for Democracy) and Luthfee Editor of Sandhaan. All three live in exile in UK, USA and Switzerland. Mr. Saadiq paid the ultimate price by spending 5 years in jail while his daughter was poisoned by Gayoom.

If Gayoom is what he says, he must allow them to visit the country, return all their assets and release all political prisoners before the end of his term in the next 2 weeks.

Post new comment

The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.
  • Allowed HTML tags: <a> <em> <strong> <cite> <code> <ul> <ol> <li> <dl> <dt> <dd><b> <i> <br> <p> <div> <img> <map>
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.
  • You may quote other posts using [quote] tags.
More information about formatting options

Demotix

Democracy Support

The openDemocracy / International IDEA debate

Read Democracy on the ground by Keith Brown

International Institute for Democracy and Electoral Assistance