Observations on Nasheed

Written by Ahmed Maajid

Imagine the Prime Minister of the UK standing behind a podium and uttering the following words: “Anyone from my own party who comes to me requesting for something will get it done; should anyone from another party do the same, he or she would have to taste my wrath”. What might happen then?

I can imagine the whole nation erupting like a volcano, the leader’s own party disowning him, the media going into frenzy, and the Prime Minister being thrown out of not just his job but out of his political carrier for ever.

However, former President of the Maldives and the “spiritual” leader of the Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) said so and survived; not just as the President of the Maldives but also as the “golden boy”, for whom the Commonwealth is frantically vouching. No wonder why this is so, as the whole thing is a façade masking the faces of the “long men” of today’s world who have a particular dislike and contempt for Islam.

That was not all. Nasheed’s party leaders, in his presence and with his tacit approval, said clearly that “the apartment blocks built by the Government are only for MDP members, and others would have a chance only if any are left after MDP members pick their flats”.

Would the people of UK accept such a man as their Prime Minister? Would any of the persons sitting in the CMAG accept such a man as the leader of his or her country?

Just compare the words of Nasheed with those of Francois Hollande who won the French presidential runoff today. “To those who haven't voted for me - let them know that I hear them, and that I will be president to all. There is one France, united in the same destiny”, said Hollande in one of his victory speeches. For him, not just members of his party are the people to benefit from his rule; for Nasheed, it would just be his party, and others “would see how terrible a person he can be, if they expect him to be their President too”.

We the Maldivian people value freedom, justice, human rights, right conduct in governance, etc. just as the people of other nations do. Where did we learn those values? From our religion—from Islam, despite the fact that this statement would make some people’s hearts burn with hatred, jealousy and contempt.

An interesting point to ponder over is Nasheed’s claim that his rule was ended with a coup d’état. Was there really coup against him? Was he unlawfully toppled from power? Just think about the following points.

Firstly, Nasheed, as a president, did things that rendered his rule illegitimate. To name a few, he told the Maldivian people that he would “take actions against the law if that is necessary”, of course with an implication communicated with a figurative phrase. Nasheed illegally used the military to lock down the Supreme Court and disrupt the functions of the Court for days. Nasheed violated the Constitution and a number of laws in ‘kidnapping’ a judge of the Criminal Court of the Maldives. Nasheed ignored Court Orders from the High Court of the Maldives and the Supreme Court of Maldives obliging him to free the judge, thereby undermining the Constitution and the efficacy of Maldivian courts. This is in addition to Nasheed’s expressed policy of favoring his own party and close associates.

Secondly, the Maldives Police Service was used by Nasheed for illegal purposes, while the Maldivian Constitution and relevant laws specifically make it incumbent on the security forces to disobey unlawful orders. The laws do not prescribe, or even envisage, a mechanism through which officers of the security forces can file a case to determine whether the order before them is unlawful. They give them, in clear and straightforward terms, the power to decide that for themselves; to say no to any unlawful order.

As Henry David Thoreau said, no person should become an agent of injustices in any circumstances, and when a person is asked to do so, he has an obligation to refuse. As such, the Maldives Police forces were perfectly justified in demanding Nasheed’s de facto administration to assure them that they would not be subjected to unlawful orders. The question whether Nasheed had given the security forces illegal orders is all settled. He did it, and did it quite unabashedly, and without care for anything or anyone. He rejected even the orders of the highest courts of land outright, without even giving so much as an artificial explanation.

Thirdly, it was Nasheed’s own choice to resign. When he resigned, his cabinet was there, some 40,000 members of his party were there. Nobody took weapons against him despite his claims. Obviously those who saw that his rule as illegitimate, unconstitutional and oppressive, and had good reason to see it so, demanded for his resignation. However, that demand was not made suddenly on the 7th of February. It had been made since Nasheed deceitfully kicked out all the members of the ‘coalition’ which helped him come to power in the first place. Nasheed did not win the presidential elections in 2008 because of his popularity. In fact, during the first round of the presidential election, former President Maumoon scored twice the number of votes collected by Nasheed, and in the second round, Nasheed formed an informal coalition comprising of all political parties except Maumoon’s DRP, and won by a very thin margin. As soon as Nasheed, or the coalition, to be true to history, won the election and Nasheed came to power, he betrayed his allies one by one, and kicked each of them out of the Government, inappropriately and unlawfully using public funds and executive power to strengthen his hold. He unlawfully and unjustly dismissed officers of the armed forces and police, bribed parliamentarians to sign for his party, which failed to win a majority in the parliamentary elections held while he was in power. As such, the people of this nation who were exasperated by the unlawful, unconstitutional, and oppressive rule of Nasheed who demanded for his resignation were practicing their constitutional right—and when Nasheed had to recede before that demand, he could not say he was “forced” to resign. He failed, and it was his failure that forced him to resign.

Fourthly, Nasheed and his party have always called for “an early presidential election” to be conducted before the scheduled date as per the Constitution—which would be between July and November 2013. Strangely, Nasheed and his party claim that they were toppled by a coup d’état, but then demand for an early presidential election. It would not take an Aristotle to realize that if Nasheed was indeed toppled by a rebellion, not an early presidential election but a reinstatement would have to follow. Why don’t Nasheed and his party claim for a restoration?

Fifthly, when Nasheed resigned, his Deputy Dr. Mohamed Waheed Hassan Manik stepped on as President, just as stipulated in the Constitution of this country in black and white. He took the Oath of Office before the Chief Justice and the President of the People’s Majlis (Parliament), who were the same persons who had been in those positions during the presidency of Nasheed.

Sixthly, there is a very interesting question—Why did it take Nasheed and his party 24 hours to realize that Nasheed was toppled in a 'coup d’état’? Within that time, some senior leaders of Nasheed’s Party including Party President Dr. Ibrahim Didi, and members of Malé City Council, expressly stated their recognition of the new President, and promised cooperation with him. However, after 24 hours, the idea of “coup” surfaced, and the claim was made. Even those leaders of MDP who had earlier expressed their intention to cooperate with the new government went back on their words.

Deputy President of MDP, Alhan Fahmy, submitted a complain at the 241 Committee of the People’s Majlis, requesting for a Parliamentary investigation of the incidents of 7th February, and to decide whether Nasheed was ousted in a coup or not. However, members of MDP attended the meeting held to discuss the matter on 11th April, and then walked out, expressly saying that they wanted to bust quorum. Why? Why wouldn’t they want the issue to be investigated in any official forum, in the country? MDP would say that they do not trust anybody in this country to do that. The Inquiry Commission is "not independent" according to them. Why? Does it contain someone who is in any way connected to the present Government? Have they ever displayed any signs of lack of integrity or being unqualified to do such a job? No! MDP would just say "they are not capable" and no explanations. They demand that some foreign commission or body must do it. How about this? We chose Brunei, Iran, and Russia to do the job. Would they agree to such a proposition?

Mohamed Nasheed was not ousted in a coup. According to many people, he is not fit to be the leader of a country by any standards used in the civilized world, and that is how he messed up the whole thing, and that is how he failed and was forced, by his failure and nothing else, to resign and go home.

An interesting incident happened a week ago, when Nasheed reportedly used MDP’s National Council to sack Party President Dr. Ibrahim Didi and Deputy President Alhan Fahmy from their offices in the party, against the Constitution of the Party. Another issue to think about!