A resounding ‘No’: Public rejection demands cabinet shake-up and policy shift

In established democratic societies, it is customary for leaders to resign when the public clearly expresses a "no." However, this has not been observed in the Maldives, either in the past or at present. In this country, officials typically need to be instructed to resign or are removed from their positions. To date, no political leadership has demonstrated sufficient democratic maturity to step down voluntarily after a failure.

In the elections held on Saturday, 68 percent of citizens rejected the reforms backed by the government, despite extensive campaigning using all its powers and resources. In the referendum, the government failed to secure the number of votes equivalent to the registered membership of the ruling People’s National Congress (PNC). Moreover, the government lost the majority of council seats across all cities, islands with huge populations, and other islands. In response, President Dr. Mohamed Muizzu stated that the government accepts the election results and will undertake necessary reforms.

Since then, several officials have been dismissed, including relatives of PNC lawmaker Asma Rasheed—who had expressed dissatisfaction with the government—as well as the Managing Directors of Fenaka Corporation, AgroNet, Maldives Ports Limited (MPL), and a senior official at Male’ Water and Sewerage Company (MWSC). Nevertheless, a critical question remains: after receiving such a decisive "no" from the public, is it not time to introduce changes within the cabinet?

The cabinet: Several ministers under scrutiny
Following his presidential victory, one of President Muizzu’s key commitments was to establish a cabinet that Maldivians could take pride in. However, the cabinet garnered criticism from the onset as the largest in the country’s history, with certain ministers under heavy scrutiny. Over time, this criticism has only intensified, and not without justification.

An examination of the cabinet makes it obvious that many ministers are very outspoken despite having limited tangible achievements. On occasion, a minister might reference figures such as 400 or 500 million appear to create unrealistic expectations or to imply outcomes—such as a reduction in the dollar rate—that may not materialize.

Another minister may make confident declarations regarding domestic matters, promising that specific issues would be resolved within set timeframes, or certain crimes would be stopped within set timeframes. However, many of these commitments remain unfulfilled. Additionally, frequent and excessive commentary on issues beyond their designated portfolios has further contributed to rising public criticism.

In the realm of foreign diplomacy, there have been multiple warning signs regarding strained relations with neighboring countries. Despite substantial expenditures on the Foreign Ministry and embassies, the level of grant aid—traditionally a key state budget component—has declined significantly, and relations with several nations have faltered.

In a country with a predominantly young population, it is questionable whether the impact of a dedicated Youth Ministry is evident through its work. Likewise, despite the Sports Ministry employing more political appointees than the population of a small island, tangible outcomes remain unclear.

Housing was identified as a budget priority last year; however, the year concluded without any significant progress. Close to the election period, applications for flats and land were opened, with regulations subject to frequent revisions. Yet the fundamental question persists: where are these flats and land plots? Not a single completed flat exists. The President had pledged that there would not be a single Maldivian who lacks adequate housing by the end of his five-year term. Based on the Housing Ministry’s current performance, the feasibility of this promise remains uncertain.

The Higher Education Ministry, Agriculture and Animal Welfare Ministry and Dhivehi Language, Culture and Heritage Ministry have also faced substantial criticism. Students have raised concerns over delays in disbursement of loan payments. There have been questions over the failure to properly manage the pet facility despite incurring millions on it. The performance of the Dhivehi Language, Culture and Heritage Ministry do not correspond with its level of expenditure. The criticism racks up across multiple sectors.

The influence of these ministers can be evaluated from the election outcomes within their respective constituencies. It can be argued that the public’s overwhelming "no" reflects dissatisfaction with government and a loss of confidence in certain ministers over various issues including their low productivity.

Changes needed to the government
Political analysts consulted for this report indicate that the government is now compelled to shift its focus away from strengthening political power and instead prioritize delivering practical outcomes for the public.

"Even after securing a full parliamentary majority, the government concentrated on strengthening its political position in its early stages, including through legislative changes. Notable examples in this trajectory includes the passage of the Anti-Defection law and attempts to merge election," said a highly experience individual in the field of politics.

"However, the results of April 4th clearly demonstrate that the public prioritizes essential services, housing, and economic development over political maneuvering.”

As such, restoring public trust now requires a results-oriented approach. The government must accelerate stalled development initiatives and implement tangible measures to enhance the standard of living for ordinary citizens. This objective can only be achieved by retaining ministers capable of delivering the results sought.

At this critical juncture, a cabinet reshuffle appears to be an urgent necessity. Replacing politically appointed individuals lacking technical expertise with qualified professionals in relevant fields would signal a genuine commitment to reform.

Governance can be strengthening by transitioning to a leadership composed of capable individuals which effectively ensures decision-making would rely on technical expertise rather than political interests. In particular, appointing professionals to key sectors such as the economy, healthcare, and education is essential for rebuilding public confidence. Failure to introduce such changes risks further intensifying public dissatisfaction.

Examples from other nations
From a comparative political perspective, it is not unusual for governments to encounter significant setbacks in mid-term elections. What is crucial, however, is the response of leadership following such outcomes. Effective leaders acknowledge the public’s message, implement changes within senior government positions, and seek collaboration with opposition groups to demonstrate responsiveness to public concerns.

In democratic systems, voting extends beyond securing seats or passing legislation. A referendum or national vote serves as a direct reflection of public confidence in governance. In advanced democracies, there are well-established norms for responding to electoral defeats, where taking political responsibility is regarded as essential. When the public expresses a clear "no" to government policies, the anticipated course of action is often a cabinet reshuffle or resignation.

A notable historical example is the 1969 referendum in France. President Charles de Gaulle proposed decentralizing governmental authority and reforming the Senate—significant constitutional changes comparable to those recently proposed by President Muizzu. However, on April 27, 1969, 52.41% of French voters rejected these proposals.

De Gaulle interpreted this outcome not merely as a policy failure but as a loss of public confidence in his leadership. Consequently, he resigned the following day, April 28. This case underscores the principle that losing a referendum initiated by a leader can signify a loss of governing mandate.

In a more recent example, the 2021 South Korean elections provide a similar lesson. During the mayoral by-elections held on April 7, the ruling Democratic Party lost control of the country’s two largest cities, Seoul and Busan—a significant setback for a party that had dominated elections since 2016.

In response, then-President Moon Jae-in acted promptly. The Prime Minister and senior party officials resigned, and on April 20, major Cabinet changes were implemented, particularly in housing and economic portfolios. The leadership acknowledged that losing major urban centers indicated a shift in middle-class support. The Cabinet reshuffle was intended to demonstrate responsiveness to public concerns. 

Globally, it is uncommon for a government to continue without changes to the cabinet following such a substantial electoral loss. Structural reforms and leadership adjustments are typically necessary to restore public trust. If this government seeks to regain the confidence of its citizens, such measures are essential.