Saturday, March 17, 2018

DICTATOR MAUMOON VS DEMOCRATIC NASHEED


Written by: Ali Assad

Some of the fundamental aspects that are seen in a dictator, especially the characteristics which the opposition branded former President Maumoon Abdul Gayyoom as a dictator compared with the supposedly champion of democracy former President Mohamed Nasheed.

Nepotism - the practice among those with power or influence of favouring relatives or friends, especially by giving them jobs. Maumoon had family members in cabinet and so did Nasheed. Nasheed’s cousin Kerefa Naseem was Foreign Minister. Whilst his cousin by marriage Aslam Shakir was State Minister for Foreign Affairs. Furthermore, Health Minister Aminath Jameel is another family relative. Even Sabra Noorahdheen, Head of Police Intel was from Kerefa family. The list is endless. So, who had more family and friends in appointed political positions, Maumoon or Nasheed?

Corruption - dishonest or fraudulent conduct by those in power, typically involving bribery. Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) labelled Maumoon as one of the most corrupt Maldivian President. There were very highly publicized corruption scandals during Maumoon’s presidency. However, MDP faces a blind spot, when it comes to the fact that high level MDP founder members or people funding the party were involved in these corrupt deals. The first time Maldives was internationally ranked for corruption was in 2007 by Transparency International and Maldives got 84th position with a score of 33 from 100 (a perfect score of 100 meant very clean & 0 meant very corrupt). Opposition MDP was jubilant with the ranking and highly criticized Maumoon for being more corrupt than neighbouring India, which was in 72nd position. When MDP came to power, the ranking skyrocketed and in 2010 Nasheed beat Zimbabwe’s President Mugabe ranking of 134th with 143rd position. The most corrupt Maldivian regime’s score of 23 was also achieved by Nasheed in 2010. In 2016 Maldives was ranked at 95th position with the best anti-corruption score of 36 in Maldivian history.

8 Presidential Members Of Parliament - Maumoon had 8 appointed members in parliament representing him. MDP was against this and campaigned hard to remove this from the constitution. This was done when the new modern constitution was prepared but during the power struggle to democracy, it was basically agreed for the interim period to keep Maumoon’s MP’s, as a safety net for someone leaving from power after a long time. This was clearly written in the constitution for the interim period - Maumoon’s 8 Presidential MP’s were to remain in their seat until the new Parliament was elected in 2009. However, within 24 hours after Nasheed took the oath as president he went against the constitution and appointed his own 8 Presidential Members. After this the opposition claimed that in cohesion with the former Election Commissioner (who was a founder member of MDP), Nasheed delayed the Parliament vote for about 6 months to take advantage of the Parliament majority he had seized. Eventually Nasheed’s appointed Supreme Court bench ruled that Nasheed’s actions were unlawful and the illegally removed Maumoon’s 8 Presidential MP’s were to be given due compensation.

Non-Independent Judiciary - Judicial independence is the concept that the judiciary needs to be kept away from the other branches of government. That is, courts should not be subject to improper influence from the other branches of government, or from private or partisan interest. Maumoon was the head of the Judiciary under the old constitution. Under the new constitution the Judicial powers were separated from the Executive. Nasheed was maybe alien to this concept because in his short term, he locked up the Supreme Court, kidnapped the serving Chief Judge of the Criminal Court and didn’t heed to any of the court orders to release arbitrarily detained political prisoners.

Absence Of Freedom Of Speech - Freedom of speech is the concept of being able to speak freely without censorships. During Maumoon’s first four presidential terms this was not allowed. Nor were we an educated or developing country. As the times changed, Maldives transformed into a developing nation. Even though the lid on free speech was kept tightly squeezed, with an educated younger generation emerging and with mounting pressure for democracy, the last 5 years of Maumoon’s era saw some level of free speech. With Nasheed in power he extended free speech to new heights. Anti-Muslim bloggers were encouraged to mock Islam. Anti-Muslim/Islam Facebook pages were run by Nasheed loyalists who were hardcore MDP supporters. Maldives was getting overdosed with free speech but when it came to criticism of Nasheed over his Islamophobic rants and iron fist rule, he could not digest it. Nasheed even started a campaign “Thihineh Nukiyene” meaning “You can’t SAY that” to crack down on opposition.

Absence OF Press Freedom – Freedom of the press or freedom of the media is the freedom of communication and expression through various mediums, such as electronic media and published materials. During Maumoon’s terms this was nonexistent. Under the new modern constitution these rights were given almost without any limits. Nasheed was also a writer/reporter but when in power he did everything in power to stop free press. Most printed media were run through advertisement money received by government to print notices for jobs and bids. One of the first thing Nasheed did was to stop this indirect funding in the name of cutting government costs. It was not a bad move but the purpose was suspiciously doubtful and opposition rightfully claimed a move to stifle free press. Incidents of press who covered opposition demonstration being attacked by police increased dramatically. Opposition TV stations were attacked and burned by Nasheed’s loyalists. The attacks against media were so brutal and frequent during Nasheed’s regime, the media even carried out demonstrations against the oppression of press freedom.

Control Of State Media
- State-controlled media is media which is owned, dictated, and managed by a government. State-controlled media uses propaganda- information, which is usually biased or misleading, to promote a political cause or point of view to control its people. Maumoon controlled the state media with a tight grip until his last term, which saw encouraging levels of freedom and opposition coverage. Nasheed inherited the state media while it was moving in this positive direction. With Nasheed in power, the state media did not take an immediate U-turn from this reformation but slowly the breaks were placed down and subtly the direction diverted to full government control again. First it was a yellow banner on the state TV channels, which is the official colour of MDP. By the time Nasheed resigned it was strictly 100% government controlled media or just another MDP channel. Even if an opposition member is given an opportunity to go on a state TV or radio program, Nasheed loyalists made sure that it was under police protection that he has to go in and out of the station, after taking part in any political program. The audiences chosen supposedly from the general public in all the state media programs, were handpicked from Nasheed’s campaign office adjacent to state TV station. After this fake general public audience finished their participation and questionings in programs, tea and other special benefits were made available from MDP campaign office / Haruge next to TV Maldives.

Absence Of Freedom Of Expression – Freedom of expression is the right of every individual to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers. This was not allowed during Maumoons presidency. Nasheed campaigned hard to grant freedom of expression but when in power and when the people protested against Nasheed’s unconstitutional acts, it turned out to be difficult for him to digest. His regime has the worst record for the highest number of tear gas used against protesters and the first and only president in Maldivian history to use Water Canon and rubber bullets against protesters. Not surprisingly Nasheed won a place in top ten, in the biggest crackdowns of the decade listed by The Washington Post.

Absence Of Free & Fair Elections – An election is considered “free” and “fair” when you can decide whether to vote or not to vote, vote freely for the candidate or party of your choice without fear or intimidation and all registered political parties have an equal right to contest the elections, campaign for voter support, hold meetings and rallies. The old constitution only allowed for referendums which asked whether the population wanted Maumoon in power or not. Opposition was harshly critical of this, calling it a “Bodu Kaafu Kuda Kaafu” vote. “Kaafu” is a Dhivehi letter. The above saying literally translates into capital “Kaafu” and simple “Kaafu” vote. The Divehi letter “Kaafu” looked like a “correct” tick. Even though Dhivehi does not have capital and simple letters, the joke is that the public was asked to vote for a simple “kaafu” if “No” and a capital “kaafu” if “Yes”, leading to a yes vote for Maumoon, whichever way the public voted. In the first multi-party 2008 elections, Maumoon won most votes but not enough to win the election. Under a coalition Nasheed won the election but Maumoon accused that Nasheed had rigged the election using Election Commissioner Fuad Thaufeeg’s influence, who was a former MDP founder member and a harsh critic of Maumoon and members in the elections commission like Saabe who was Nasheed’s cousin MP Eva’s husband. When Nasheed came to power he publicly said that he will directly influence the votes. There is even a leaked audio of allegedly Fuad and Nasheed discussing election fraud.

Arbitrary Detention & Arrests – is the arrest or detention of an individual in a case in which there is no likelihood or evidence that he or she committed a crime against legal statute, or in which there has been no proper due process of law. During Maumoon’s era literary the constitution allowed this. Maumoon was famous for arbitrary detention and arrests. When Nasheed came to power the constitution protected against such arrests but he did it anyway. All the well-known leading political figures were arbitrarily arrested and detained during Nasheed’s regime. Some of the more prominent figures include the current President Yameen, whilst he was a MP and leader of People's Alliance. Another was leader of Jumhooree Party and also an MP, Qasim Ibrahim. Nasheed even used military tanks to arrest the Deputy Speaker of Parliament, MP Ahmed Nazim. Former VP Jameel was arbitrarily arrested 6 time in a week before Nasheed’s most famous act of the extrajudicial arbitrary detention / kidnapping of Criminal Court, Chief Judge Abdulla Mohamed.

Island Chiefs / Councilors
– Maumoon had a political appointee in charge of every inhabited island, called an Island Chief. The new constitution allowed only an elected local council system. However, when Nasheed came to power he appointed the councilors to the islands just like the appointed Island Chiefs. Hardcore Nasheed loyalist were appointed and most of them were not educationally or in any other way fit for the job. Even people with criminal record for drugs offences were appointed. Nasheed’s suspiciously close relationship with former Election Commissioner Fuad, is accused as a factor which delayed having local council elections as per the constitution mandated dates, thus providing an outrageous excuse for Nasheed to appoint councilors.

Multi religious freedom
– Maldives constitution did not allow multi-religious freedom. However, Nasheed employed consultants like Benedict Rogers who was Christian Solidarity Worldwide’s East Asia Team Leader and David Hardingham – a previously blacklisted and deported missionary worker from Maldives. Nasheed loyalists ran blogs and Facebook pages to promote multi-religious freedom and LGBT rights.

Torture in prisons – According to recent Maldivian history, one of the most famous Maldivian president for torture in prisons is president Nasir. This system was passed on and inherited by the next president Maumoon. Supporters of Maumoon claim that compared to the Asian region, Maldivian prisons were much better. However, the killing of an inmate, Evan Naseem by prison police led to one of the worst riots in Maldivian history. The riots started in the prison after Evan Naseem was beaten to death and due to the riots in prison, police were forced to use live ammunition which led to more deaths. Thus, eventually the riots escalating into the streets of the capital city, Male’. During Nasheed’s era there were a few cases of prison deaths but no proof that it was due to torture but probably just natural deaths. In Nasheed’s regime the prison was torched about 3 times, costing millions of Rufiyaa in damages to tax paying Maldivians. His critics claimed that during his regime the prisoners had more power than the prison guards. Adding weight to this claim is the fact that in election votes Nasheed and his party always wins the majority votes from jailed convicts.

Gangs/militia force
– During Maumoon’s era there was gang violence (not well-organized criminal groups but just friends from the same neighbourhood). However, this was non-existent in the political arena. Nasheed came to power with the promise of change and mainly with the support of the younger generation. This also included the gangs. Nasheed used this gang force to intimidate and terrorize his political opponents. For the first time in Maldivian history opposition MP’s like MP Ilham, MP Mahloof, MP Thasmeen, Senior politicians and political leaders like leader of Islamic Democratic Party Umar had to employ personal body guards. It seemed like the use of gangs was not enough and Nasheed created a program called “Dhevanafurusathu” (Second Chance) to facilitate the release of hardcore criminals without proper probation assessments. During the last days of Nasheed’s regime, in addition to gangs, these released criminals were used to attack opposition protesting against the kidnapping of Criminal Court Chief Judge Abdullah Mohamed.

Long Rule
– Maumoon ruled for 30 years. One of the characteristics that Nasheed opposed before coming to power. When in power the political rhetoric from MDP changed. They were calling to change the constitution and make way to elect Nasheed for 3 terms or more. On the extreme side in their political podiums they were calls to elect Nasheed for 500 years.

Economic problems – The Maumoon presidency was considered days of prosperity and peace. With the democracy illusion came violence and instability. Nasheed regime saw the worst inflation in Maldives history. Corruption became common place. Purchasing of MP’s was fashionable. The Maldivian currency saw more than 20% devaluation. Dollar rate soared to MVR15.42, while in the black market it went as high as MVR20.00. The construction industry collapsed. Debt was at worrisome level. Budget deficit reached a record level. The country faced an economic meltdown during the short 3 years of Nasheed’s regime.

So, is the characteristics of a dictator an almost perfect fit for Nasheed?

Tuesday, March 13, 2018

THE DEMOCRATIC DICTATOR


Written by: Ali Assad

What is a dictatorship?

Is it just a word reserved for the opposition to call the incumbent president? A word that the rich and powerful or especially the West can use to topple governments that is not in line with their views or interests?

The line between a democratic leader and a dictator is so blurred politically these days that the best solution is to take a more scientific approach, like when identifying a species and thus categorizing a dictator using the characteristics of one.

A dictatorship is a form of government characterized by the absolute rule of one person or a very small group of people who hold all political power.

One of the most famous Maldivian “dictator” is President Maumoon Abdul Gayyoom, but to his supporters he was the leader of the golden 30 years of Maldives.

Why was former President Maumoon Abdul Gayyoom called a dictator?

Let’s compare the characteristics of “why” Maumoon was branded a “dictator” with the factual characteristics of another leader. The first person to be elected under the new modern Maldivian democratic constitution is former president Mohamed Nasheed and hence a good guinea pig to compare democracy and dictatorship. So, if there is such a thing as a “Dictator meter”, and Maumoon was used as a measuring weight to gauge dictatorship, what would be Nasheed – a dictator or democratic leader?

Main characteristics of “why” Maumoon was branded a dictator are; nepotism, corruption, 8 appointed Presidential Members of Parliament, non-independency of judiciary, absence of freedom of speech, absence of press freedom, controlling state media, absence of freedom of expression, absence of free and fair elections, arbitrary detention and arrests and appointed Island Chiefs. To someone new in Maldives politics, it would be a surprise to know that, in the short 3 years of Nasheed’s regime, he displayed all these traits and even some more than Maumoon. A detailed analysis of these characteristics of Maumoon as a dictator, compared with the supposedly democratic leader Nasheed is reviewed in another separate article (DICTATOR MAUMOON VS DEMOCRATIC LEADER NASHEED).

The difference is that even though Nasheed demonstrated his true self as a full-fledged dictator, there were democratic values that he upheld, which made him a champion of democracy to his Western backers.

What divides the two leaders cum dictators are while Maumoon was against multi-religious freedom, it was one of Nasheed’s most praised character according to his Western friends. Nasheed was also in favour of providing LGBT rights. And as an additional plus point, in Nasheed’s short term in office, he did not torture prisoners in jail.

From this tangled and politically divided mess of democracy and dictatorship, it is very difficult to make out head or tail. Furthermore, the possibility of finding a leader, who calls him or herself a DICTATOR is not theoretically possible. Instead, dictators have ordinary titles such as “My President”, “Supreme Leader”, “Inthihaabee Raees” (Elected President) and other similar monikers. That's because 'dictator' has become a pejorative term assigned to certain rulers by their opposition and other powerful nations, such as the United States, United Kingdom, Israel and many others to promote their agenda.

Sometimes, it is questionable what is better, a dictator or a democratic leader. Most of the countries recently destroyed or are being destroyed by powerful countries in the name of importing democracy was thriving economically under the so called “dictatorships”. Good examples are Libya and Syria.

In the name of regime change or importing democracy, Iraq was destroyed. The domino effects of chaos, famine, refugees are still continuing today. What is worse the torture by Saddam in Abu Ghraib jail or the torture by US forces in Abu Ghraib jail? It would not be unfair to state, for wealth, power and domination sometimes democratic countries use imaginary Weapons of Mass Destruction or an imaginary dictator.

Some dictators see themselves as a transition to democracy – Nasheed’s rants about democracy to gain power and later him becoming allergic to democracy when in power, is a good example.

Others even allow limited freedom of expression, as long as the expression, written or spoken, doesn’t directly challenge the dictator’s rule. This resembles the “Thihineh Nukiyene” or translated as “You Can’t Say That” campaign run during Nasheed’s regime by his party, Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) to thwart opposition’s freedom of expression.

There have been dictators who got there legally. Adolf Hitler, for example, was appointed chancellor, or head of government, by President Paul von Hindenburg in 1933. After Hindenburg died, Hitler made himself Fü­hrer (a combination of president and chancellor). Nasheed came to power after winning an election, which his opponent Maumoon claimed was rigged. Indirectly the finger is pointed towards the former Elections Commissioner, ex MDP founder member Fuad and former Elections Commission member Saabe (Nasheed’s cousin MP Eva’s husband). Hence a democratically elected leader or one claimed to be democratically elected does not necessarily have to be democratic.

Mostly a dictatorship is commonly thought of as one person, the dictator himself. Usually, there is one man at the top, but occasionally the top ruler answers to some extent to a dictatorial political party. The leader of the party has no named successor. The dictator almost never has a named successor - one oddly common trait among different types of dictatorships. MDP has an appointed one and only supreme leader called Nasheed, making him the unquestionably uncontestable unelected leader forever.

Many of these dictators foster cults of personality, a form of hero worship in which the masses are fed propaganda declaring their leader to be flawless and in some cases divine. Nasheed has the worst record in Maldivian history as the leader who went against Islamic principles and values but his Muslim support base is completely blind and oblivious to this fact.

Depending on which side of the fence you stand, the hazy line between a dictator and a democratic leader is warped and distorted, until it fits to your supporting beliefs.

So, is Nasheed a dictator who wants to look democratic or a democratic dictator?

Sunday, March 4, 2018

MALDIVIAN THREESOME COUP


As the dust settles from the hectic judicial events that recently unfolded in paradise, people are wondering what really happened?

Is this an attack on democracy? Was this a coup? Did someone bribe the Supreme Court? The answers are entangled in the love and hate triangle between former Presidents Maumoon, Nasheed and leader of Jumhooree Party, Qasim Ibrahim.

On 1st February 2018, SC of Maldives, released a ruling that rocketed the country into political turmoil. Facts that we know are, SC’s decision about 12 members of Parliament not losing their seats were already being deliberated in the bench and their decision whichever way is of no surprise. On the other hand, the out of the blue verdict to release 9 convicted criminals was quite a bombshell, no new evidence or incident has happened for SC to backtrack on their own previous decisions that the judicial process for completed trials of some of these criminals were free and fair. Anywhere else in this world it will definitely ring alarm bells, when a SC decides to announce a ruling on their own regarding selected powerful criminals without any formal due judicial process. The final absurdity for democracy is that the power of the Judicial Service Commission was annulled, which is unconstitutional. This destroys the check and balance system of separation of powers in a democracy.

Why the SC ruling looked like a mixed salad, drafted for the benefit of specific filthy rich powerful people, is a mystery. Even more suspicious is that the SC ruling coincided on a weekend and during night, which will definitely create maximum havoc within the government.

The scenario of MP’s losing their seat in Parliament, if they change parties is widely agreed upon by pro and opposition supporters. This is something that even Nasheed said is required to improve the democratic process in Maldives. Surely a good antidote to killing corruption within the Parliament. During Nasheed’s regime, opposition members changed party overnight becoming suddenly rich enough to purchase plots of land worth millions of dollars. Maldivian Democratic Party former chairperson, Ali Waheed is a good example of such a transfer from opposition political party Progressive Party of Maldives to MDP. When President Yameen came to power, his former Vice President Ahmed Adheeb was accused of continuing this precedent of Parliament corruption set by Nasheed. The most famous transfers are the recent transfer of 12 ruling party MP’s to opposition. The group have travelled abroad to Sri Lanka and then announced the deal.

List of criminals ordered by SC to be released includes people like Nasheed, who is a self-confessed convicted kidnapper of a serving judge and Adheeb, who is the mastermind behind the bomb assassination attempt on President Yameen and 1.2 billion Rufiyaa Maldives Marketing and Public Relations Corporation (MMPRC) corruption scandal.

What does Maumoon, Qasim and Nasheed gain from the SC verdict?

The power war between Maumoon and President Yameen within the ruling party is no secret. Maumoon wanted people loyal to him in key positions like the Prosecutor General & Speaker of Parliament. President Yameen did not yield to his elder brother’s pressure, thus creating a huge drift between the half-brothers. Another crucial factor is Maumoon’ son, Farish Maumoon, now being groomed for the presidential position. Farish can be seen as a stepping stone for Maumoon to grasp power again.

Qasim has been chasing the presidents seat for a long time now. After becoming one of the richest business tycoon in Maldives, his quest for more power has seen him indulge in politics. He has filled ministerial positions in all recent governments but the top position of president is a trophy he has not achieved. Problems facing Qasim when in politics is his commercial interests outweighs his public responsibilities as a politician. Critics joke that Qasim as Transport Minister signs deals for Villa Air, and on behalf of Villa Air signs as Qasim the Chairman. In all recent governments, he has flexed his financial influence to get tax exemptions, one way or the other. Currently he owes the state about USD200 million in unpaid tax money. A fraction of which could be easily paid to SC judges to carry out a ruling in his favour, so the balance becomes unpaid history. His intimacy with SC judges goes deeper, with his interest to remove the article in the constitution that stipulates people above 65 is not eligible to contest in the Presidential race. This can be very easily achieved through a SC under his payroll.

Nasheed is a self-confessed convicted kidnapper of a serving judge. Holds the record for most corrupt leader of Maldives according to Transparency International. The Washington Post listed Nasheed’s regime in its “Crackdowns of the decade” list, due to his violent crush of opposition protests. During his regime, Maldives succumbed into nearly total economic failure. However, Nasheed is a wild card, that is crucial in the quest to defeat Yameen, because of his wealthy powerful friends in the West. Nasheed’s party MDP was developed with the backing and help of Western powerful parties, and surly they will take care of their begotten child. Billionaires like Richard Branson, share Nasheed’s dream of full LGBT rights to Maldivians. Nasheed’s close adviser and best friend in UK, Benedict Rogers, is the East Asia Team Leader at the international human rights organization Christian Solidarity Worldwide (CSW), where he specialises in Burma, Indonesia, North Korea and Maldives. Their mission is religious freedom for all. Therefore, it is no wonder that Nasheed called on the Jesuits for help during a visit to Denmark. The molestation and rape of children by priests in America, over the past 15 years is estimated to result in more than USD3.3 billion of settlements to silent the victims. Hence, it is not a wild guess to say that the funds involved for an opportunity for a church in Maldives will be enormous. Nasheed gets freedom or a chance to be installed as President of Maldives by his Western financiers.

Agreeable common grounds between Qasim and Maumoon, is the opportunity of Farish becoming running mate of Qasim. Where does Nasheed fit in this love embrace between Qasim and Maumoon? The answer maybe, an unlimited supply of funds and backing from the Western countries rooting for Nasheed. Will Nasheed agree for Qasim and Maumoon to be on top position? In this power struggle who will come first? Whatever the answers might be, it is definitely a very volatile threesome political love affair.

So far President Yameen has been able to hold on to power from a well-organized and orchestrated wave of attacks to topple him.

What climax will the three mighty opponents reach in their lust for power?