Is this the right time to reduce import duty?

Listening to the ongoing Majlis debate on the Import Export Act, where Member after Honorable Member spoke about reducing the import duty on a variety of items, it appears as if they believe the national treasury is bloated with loads of surplus cash. But as is painfully obvious, the reality is different. In fact, the financial situation is so precarious that unless additional revenue is generated the budget will be insolvent at the end of the year.

Over the past one and half years the budget has been overwhelmed with ill-advised salary hikes, unaffordable overtime payments, fanciful allowances and, above all, reckless spending to woo the electorate. As of now the ability to pay salaries is also in doubt, let alone implement programs to fulfill government promises. In this situation, talking about cutting an important source of government revenue appears out of place.

Import duty normally accounts for about a third of government revenue. If the proposals currently being discussed are adopted, it would lead to a revenue loss amounting to Rf 500 million, according to Economic Development Minister Mohamed Rasheed.

MPs supported reducing import duty believing it would reduce the cost of living. However experts differ. They say that even if duty is waived on diesel and essential food items, it would not help the people unless the current dollar shortage is adequately addressed. So this may not be the right time to reduce import duty.

[To read details of the Majlis debate click here.]

MDP and independents score highest vote shares

The results of Majlis Election 2009 announced* by the Elections Commission on Sunday indicate that MDP scored 31.1% of valid votes, which is the highest vote share of any party or group. This represents 51,167 votes out of the total of 166,082 valid votes cast. MDP is closely followed by independents, who scored 30.3% vote share, or 49,862 votes.

DRP which bagged 28 Majlis seats, scored 24.8%, or 40,822 valid votes. However, since they scored this number through only 59 candidates, their scoring rate is higher at 692 votes per candidate. This is higher than MDP’s scoring rate of 682 votes per candidate (MDP fielded 75 candidates) and the independents’ scoring rate of 202 votes per candidate (with 247 candidates).

PA scored 5% of the vote share or 8,283 votes. They averaged 460 votes per candidate (18 candidates), which is considerably lower than MDP scoring rate. JP, DQP and other parties scored a combined vote share of 9.7% or 15,948 votes. They averaged 285 votes per candidate (56 candidates).

The following is the list of individuals who scored the top 10 results in terms of numbers:
1. Gasim Ibrahim (JP) 1,961 votes
2. Ahmed Siyam Mohamed (Ind) 1,423
3. Mohamed Musthafa (MDP) 1,423
4. Ibrahim Mohamed Solih (MDP) 1,413
5. Ahmed Mohamed (DRP) 1,395
6. Rozaina Adam (DRP) 1,378
7. Mohamed Ghassan Maumoon (DRP) 1,324
8. Ahmed Shareef Abdulrahman Yoosuf (Ind) 1,317
9. Ahmed Makhloof (DRP) 1,280
10. Eva Abdulla (MDP) 1,243
Interestingly the 7th and 8th top scorers lost the election.

[* includes Thimarafushi interim results, though not officially declared by Elections Commission]

Lessons from Majlis Results

From the composition of the new People's Majlis (preliminary) one can draw certain tentative conclusions on voter preferences and their vision of the future role of the Majlis. Below are a few points for discussion.

• Voters appear to have a distinctive inclination towards mercurial candidates who can express themselves fluently and create high drama on the Majlis floor. This is indicated by the success of Reeko Moosa Manik, Nihan, Alhan, Thoriq, Ali Waheed and the two Nasheeds. On a positive note, these members appear to be at a higher intellectual plane compared to who they are replacing. Thus this time it may not be just talk, but also substance.
  
• There doesn't appear to be too many buyers for the MDP slogan 'fulfilling promises,' as compared to the DRP slogan 'holding the government responsible.' It doesn't require rocket science to find out why. 'Holding the government responsible' is the logical function of a parliament. Further, in a presidential system a parliamentary majority is not indispensable to fulfill government promises.
  
• The relative success of DRP/PA Coalition despite all the audit reports detailing their past deeds shows that the Maldivian people are not vindictive. Instead of harping on the past they appear to want to move on.
  
• The electorate has given a strong thumbs-up signal to the party system, as indicated by the overwhelming success of party candidates, many of who were unknown and would have ended with 2 digit results without party backing. While it is true that 13 independents won, some of them are not really independents in the usual sense of the word. People like Nasheed, Ahmed Shyam, Red Wave Saleem and Zahir Adam are independents just because they wanted to fight the election that way. None of them will suffer from the usual disadvantages faced by run-of-the-mill independents, and the voters know that.
  
• An interesting side story is the success of Dr. Afraasheem while his critics Sheikh Ilyas and Hussein Rasheed Ahmed did not make it. However, this appears to have less to do with their religious views and more to do with local politics. Afraasheem had the full backing of DRP, the dominant political party in Raa Atoll. In contrast, Ilyas and Hussein Rasheed had to fight not only DRP, but also MDP, their own coalition partner. Afraasheem also enjoyed the luxury of belonging to an elite family of Ungoofaru from where he won the election.
  

Some Big Guns Misfire

Election 2009 has thrown quite a few surprises for a large number of big names in Maldives politics. According to the preliminary results announced so far, many veteran parliamentarians are on their way out of the Majlis. Some of them failed probably because they made wrong political decisions on party affiliation; others because they could not perform to expectations, while yet others simply because they were unlucky.

Perhaps the unluckiest is Ibrahim Ismail, who will best be remembered as the main architect of the current Constitution. He was ousted by the massive MDP wave that swept across Male. Ibra was simply unlucky to be pitted against MDP Chairperson Maria Ahmed Didi.

On the top of the list of those who made wrong decisions in their campaigns is Mohammed Ibrahim Didi (Mody). Despite being closely affiliated with the ruling MDP, he decided to fight his Fuahmulaku seat as an independent. In the end, he lost to MDP official candidate Shifaq Mufeedh (Histo).

Veteran Ahmed Abdullah also appears to have made a mistake in leaving DRP and fighting his Laamu Atoll seat on a Jumhoori Party ticket. He was swept aside by the rising tide of the DRP/PA wave in the atoll.

Ruling Coalition bigwigs ADK Nashid and Hassan Afeef surprised everyone by losing seats that were considered very safe till the results were announced. Their loss could perhaps be attributed to overconfidence.

Despite a very credible performance in the Majlis, Ibrahim Shareef (Mavoata) also lost his home seat this time. This could perhaps be because voters were not very happy with his tendency to change parties.

Voters appear to have rejected candidates who openly took advantage of their membership of the last Majlis to further their business interests. Similarly they also appear to have rejected those who have given valuable services to the Majlis in the distant past but are now obviously past their prime.

All in all, voters appear to have used their discretion very well to reject whom they rejected. An exception to this generalization would be Ibrahim Ismail.

Why should you vote in the election?

Majlis candidates have come up with a wide range of reasons why they think you should vote for them. Here is a selection of some of the more popular reasons (among the candidates). Let's go through them to see if you can find a reason good enough to make you take the walk to the polling booth.

Visiting the constituency at 2 to 3 month intervals: This is a very popular promise in candidate manifestos. Ostensibly it is to learn the concerns of the people. This promise will be fulfilled for Male constituencies (for obvious reasons), but islanders will be lucky if they see their member once in 6 months.

Reducing salary to about 50% or donating the salary to constituency: Another very popular reason. This is going to be the first broken promise. Mark my words. You will never hear about this promise after the election.

Quran teacher and religious lectures: No manifesto will be complete without using the religious card.

Embroidery and tailoring courses for women: This promise simply has to be there. How can chauvinists hide their true colors?

Reporting back parliamentary proceedings to constituency: An elaboration of the first promise. Is this really necessary when the Majlis is shown live on TV?

Raising issues in the Majlis: This is a promise every candidate will love to fulfill. Who can resist the temptation of acting in the biggest 'Kasauti' in town?

Maintain good attendance record: Easier said than done.

Establishing a club house in Male for constituents: This is my favorite reason. If anyone promises a club house for Henveyru South constituents behind Dharubaaruge, my vote goes to him/her.

Helping government achieve its agenda: This is the ruling party reason for choosing their candidates.

Holding the government accountable: The opposition party reason.

Child Right’s Law and Juvenile Delinquency

Since 1991, when the Law on the Rights of Children was passed, crimes among children under 18 have skyrocketed. There are reasons to believe that this increase is not a mere coincidence and that the law is at least partially responsible for the rising trend of juvenile delinquency. Why then did the Maldives pass such a law and what have been its effects on criminal activity among children?

Maldives probably passed the law under pressure from international organizations. What gives credence to this belief is that the country was not institutionally ready then or even now to implement some key provisions of the law. For example, Article 9 of the Law requires a separate juvenile justice system to deal with children who break the law (See below). Similarly Article 8 requires rehabilitative services for children who misbehave on the streets and public places. In 1991 the state had neither the physical facilities nor the human resources to implement these 2 Articles. In fact after more than 17 years, even today it doesn’t have.

It is generally perceived by both adults and children that juvenile offenders are free to commit to any crime and walk scot free. There are also reports of adults using children to commit crimes such as drug peddling, because children could escape the law easily. However, government agencies charged with the responsibility of implementing the Child Rights Law deny this, saying there are provisions in the law to deal with juvenile offenders. So what’s the truth? One could see the answer in Article 29 (b), which says crimes committed by children must be handled by the juvenile justice system described in Article 9. Of course, we all know that this juvenile justice system does not exist. Therefore crimes committed by children go unpunished.

Who is responsible for this sorry state of affairs?
Should the blame go to child rights officials who proposed a law for which the country was not ready?

Should we question the Majlis whether, before passing the law, they ascertained if it was implementable and whether resources were available for it?

Why didn’t the state develop the facilities and human resources required to implement Articles 8 and 9 of the Law even after 17 years?

Some selected Articles of Law 9/91
8. [The Government] must take steps to rehabilitate children who misbehave and break rules on the street and in public places. The Government must take, within its means, appropriate corrective measures to reform and discipline those who are not improved by these steps.

9. [The Government] must establish a separate [juvenile justice] system to study, investigate, try and punish, where necessary, crimes committed by children. And in cases of crimes committed by children who have not attained the burden of responsibility (non ‘mukallafu’) priority must be given to rehabilitate the children instead of punishing them.

29. (a). In case of a legal or sharia crime committed by a person considered a child under this law, if the child is mukallafu (attained the burden of responsibility) he/she must bear the responsibility for the crime.
29. (b). In case of children who must take legal or sharia responsibility under this article, the investigation, trial and punishment must be conducted through the system mentioned in article 9.

Reflections on Electoral Constituency Allocation

Some electoral constituencies are more equal than others. The Election Commission's interim report on delineating electoral constituencies shows that the sizes of individual constituencies vary widely from a low of 1079 population in Vaavu Keyodhoo to a high of 6065 population in Hulhudoo-Meedhoo. Thus a person in Keyodhoo has nearly 6 times more say in the Majlis election than a voter in Meedhoo.

Actually 2 atolls of the Maldives (Vaavu and Faafu) have less population than Hulhudoo-Meedhoo and two other atolls (Alifu Alifu and Meemu) have nearly equal populations. However, these 4 atolls will all be sending 2 members each to the Majlis, while Hulhudoo-Meedhoo will be sending just one member.

This discrepancy cannot be fully blamed on the Election Commission because it has to work within the limits set by the Constitution. The Constitution allots 2 members to each of what it calls 'administrative zones.' If the population of an administrative zone exceeds 5000, then one extra member is allotted for each additional 5000. It is this 2-tiering of constituencies and administrative zones that is partially responsible for the problem. However the relevant law does give the Election Commission some leeway in reducing discrepancies. In the case of Hulhudoo-Meedhoo the Commission has decided to make it a single constituency to "maintain social harmony."

Inter-constituency differences are not the only problem with the allocation of Majlis seats. The total of 77 members is also a cause for concern. It is about 50% more than the outgoing Majlis. Many citizens question whether such a high number of expensive members are needed for a population of just 300,000.

[Note: Meedhoo is one among the author's 3 home islands, the other 2 being Male and Kulhudhuffushi]

Election Fever Rising Once Again

Members of the People's Majlis like to self style themselves 'honorable'. But 'honorable' could today be the last word people think of while referring to members of this supposed to be August body. Their public esteem appears to have taken a nosedive when they decided to hike their salaries several fold through a self vote. The Majlis's decision to take a holiday while important constitutional matters were pending before it did not help things. Neither did the recent debate on extending the lease tenure of tourist resorts. So what are the election prospects of the sitting members?

Today few people believe that any of the current members have any certainty of winning. The members themselves appear to share this sentiment. Most sitting members are abandoning their traditional atolls and moving to safer seats. Ali Mohamed (Noonu), Ibu (Lhaviyani), Ahmed Mohammed (Lhaviyani), Thasmeen (Baa), Shahid (Vaau), Afeef (Thaa), Modi and Maseeh (Gnaviyani) and Shareef (Seenu) are among the few who have so far announced their candidacy for their original constituencies.

The election scenario as it stands now shows the ruling party MDP ranged against former President Gayoom's DRP. In the choice of candidates the two parties appear to be adopting opposing philosophies. DRP has given preference to former government bigwigs and their families. Their list includes former ministers Mausoom, Hamdhun, Shahid and Thasmeen. Former President Gayoom's son Ghassan and Thasmeen's family members are also contesting the elections.

On the other hand, the ruling MDP has preferred ordinary persons close to the electorate. These candidates may not be rich and famous nationally, but they are quite popular in their own constituencies.

As of today, it's too early to predict the outcome of this contest between two opposing philosophies. Watch this space.

Is Majlis More Equal Than the Other Two Powers?

People's Majlis's decision to take a long holiday without passing the legislative frame for the constitutionally mandated general elections slated for February plunged the country into its first ever constitutional crisis. It also plunged the legislature into a controversy, which many believe lowered the institution's esteem by a further few notches. Supreme
Court ruled Tuesday against the Majlis decision. Now the nation waits with bated breath for the next salvo from the Majlis. In the meanwhile two questions remain unanswered.

Question 1:
Does the Majlis have final say over the other two branches of the state? Some Majlis members appear to believe that since they represent the people they must have the last word. This begs the question: who does the President represent? After all he is elected by a majority of the people of the Maldives in a direct election. When it comes to the Chief Justice, while he is not elected, his appointment by the other two branches gives him an indirect mandate from the people. Thus, the Majlis's claim to be the sole voice of the people does not appear very strong. In this particular instance can the Majlis with any confidence claim that its decision enjoys the support of a majority of Maldivians? Further, if one branch of the state has overwhelming power, is it compatible with the concept of 'checks and balances'?

Question 2: Where does the Attorney General stand constitutionally? The AG is appointed almost like any other member of the cabinet of ministers and remains a member of the executive. However he/she is supposed to represent the interests of not just the government, but the whole state in courts. This is fine under normal circumstances, but could lead to serious controversy when the interests of two branches of the state are at loggerheads.

The bottom line is can anyone, even if it's the Majlis, act with impunity and expect its decisions to go unchallenged?

 

What factors will decide the Majlis elections?

"The simulacrum is never that which conceals the truth--it is the truth which conceals that there is none." –Jean Baudrillard

The conventional wisdom till October last year was if one had enough 500 rufiyaa notes to distribute on Election Day, one was assured of victory. This doctrine however came for a severe hammering almost overnight with the lukewarm response Qasim Ibrahim received for his presidential bid. All of a sudden one started hearing comments such as, 'Qasim is a good businessman and philanthropist, but not the type of person we want as president." Does this herald a paradigm shift from the plutocratic politics of the past decade, and if so what will the new determinants of the forthcoming Majlis elections be?

Money: Even if the direct influence of money is reduced it will continue to play a significant role because money will certainly be needed for campaigning. Even in the past, campaign financing may have been as important if not more important than direct vote buying. In the days prior to the formation of political parties, only government officials and businessmen had the resources to conduct campaigns in the atolls.

Government performance: Most people who voted for MDP Coalition probably voted for change –not just any change, but change for better governance. Thus the government's ability to deliver on its promises will influence voter choice. In South Asian politics a phenomenon referred to as the "Anti – Incumbency Factor" plays a significant role in elections. This factor is likely to increase if Majlis elections are delayed.

Island level patriotism: Parochial feelings at the island level are likely to be more important this time than in the past because of two reasons. One, smaller electoral constituencies comprising few islands or even a single island in some cases will enable island based leaders to campaign with relatively low budgets. Two, disillusion with party politics that is widespread in the islands will favor independents.

Religion: Religion is likely to play a relatively smaller role in this election. The truth is that the status of Islam in the Maldives was never under any real threat. The bogey of Christianity was raised as a convenient platform to attack political opponents. "Disappointment over nationalistic authoritarian regimes may have contributed to the fact that today religion offers a new and subjectively more convincing language for old political orientations…
Today's Islamic fundamentalism is also a cover for political motifs." –Jurgen Habermas

G-Factor: Let us not forget that former President Gayoom had the support of 40% of the Maldivian electorate as shown by the results of the first round of presidential election. It's left to the readers to guess what this percent will now be. Physically Gayoom may be old and past his prime, but not his image among a certain segment of the population. In elections simulacra are more important than reality.

Do you trust the Majlis to act responsibly?

Among the three powers of the state, parliament has the singular role of representing the people. So if the parliament – or People’s Majlis in the Maldives context – does not enjoy the confidence of the people, its locus standi becomes shaky.

The role of People’s Majlis came to sharp focus when it recently decided to take a recess while important legislation was pending before it regarding the general elections slated for February. The Commissioner of Elections, among others, has deplored this move saying it could jeopardize holding the elections within the constitutional deadline, possibly throwing the country into a constitutional void.

People are also concerned at the composition of the current Majlis, with its disproportionately high representation of people with direct and indirect interests in the tourism industry. These concerns are particularly acute at this time because of another piece of legislation currently before the Majlis – that to extend resort release to 50 years. Perceiving a conflict of interest in this issue, some are of the opinion that an issue such as resort lease, which would affect even future generations, must be decided through a referendum rather than a simple majority vote in the Majlis.

A salary of 62,000 rufiyaa and a total take home package of about 100,000 rufiyaa may be quite reasonable from the point of view of the many business magnates in the Majlis. However, from the point of view of the average Maldivian whose take home pay averages less than 5000 per month, it may appear a bit excessive, particularly considering the working hours.

In a democracy, the parliament is supposed to act as a watchdog over the other two powers. Conversely those two are supposed to similarly keep an eye over the parliament. This is theory. The question is does this work in the Maldives context?

Majlis Sets Dangerous Precedent

Majlis discussions yesterday on the structure of the new government have raised important Constitutional issues related to transition from one government to the other. These relate to re-structuring of government ministries and Majlis approval for cabinet ministers. How these issues are decided now could set precedents that would have future repercussions. Here are some of the issues:

1. Structure of the Government: With each change of government is it possible or desirable to redesign the entire structure of the government including arrangements for providing 1000s of services? Will there be sufficient time to do this effectively? In the US, which has a presidential system, the government structure is essentially fixed and supervised by a 15-member cabinet. In India, a parliamentary democracy, it is true that the cabinet does not have a fixed number and ministries have varying structures. But the civil service structure is essentially fixed. So with a change of government an entire department may move from one ministry to another, but no re-structuring is done within the department. This makes transition a simple matter of changing the boss.
   


2. Majlis approval for cabinet: In parliamentary democracies like India, a newly appointed cabinet must demonstrate it has the confidence of the Parliament. (In cases where the ruling party has a large majority an actual vote is not taken and it is assumed the government has the confidence of the Parliament.) In approving President Nasheed's cabinet in a 'block vote' collectively, People's Majlis acted in line with the practice in parliamentary democracies. This could set the precedent of seeking Majlis approval for cabinet (as opposed to individual members.)
   


3. Majlis approval for individual ministers: In presidential systems such as in the US approval is obtained for individual cabinet members. Since Maldivians have voted for a presidential system in the referendum of August 2007, it is assumed that the Constitution stipulates a similar procedure for approval of cabinet ministers. However, the decision taken by the Majlis yesterday does not appear to be in line with this procedure.
   

Comments: Collective approval of the cabinet could be a dangerous precedent to set. Under the current Constitution it is possible to elect a President whose party does not have a majority in the Majlis. In such a case an opposition party (or parties) could create a deadlock by voting down the cabinet along party lines. In contrast to this when approval is sought for individual members of the cabinet as in the US, decisions are taken regarding the qualification of the person in question. If he is rejected a new candidate is nominated, and this process could go on (as we often see on TV) till a suitable candidate is found; so the system works without crisis. Perhaps this procedure is more suitable for the presidential system we adopted for the Maldives.

Some challenges for the new government

The honeymoon period of Mohamed Nasheed (Anni)'s new government is likely to be short. Expectations are high among supporters, while a bruised DRP is lying in ambush for its first opportunity to strike ahead of the Majlis elections in February. So the government will be hard pressed to show results, despite overwhelming challenges.

Budget crisis:

Finance Minister Jihad has said there will be a revenue shortfall of 2.4 billion within this year. While his claim that the government has not defaulted on salary payments is true, it is also equally true that many low level employees are suffering because of restrictions on overtime payments. Finance ministry sources say the revenue for 2009 is not expected to cross the 8 billon mark. This would leave very little for development projects. So the picture is not very rosy for fulfilling election promises, unless alternative sources of revenue are identified.

Independent institutions:

Independent institutions described in the new Constitution, such as Election Commission, Auditor General, Supreme Court, Anti-Corruption Commission, and the Civil Services Commission are in various stages of infancy. They must be made fully functional and truly independent, in order to ensure that democracy takes root in the Maldives.

Strengthening the legal framework:

The Majlis faces a Herculean task in passing crucial legislation in several key areas such as local governance, penal code, political parties, university, pensions, health services, prison and parole etc. The task is all the more difficult because the ruling coalition does not command a majority in the Majlis. So the government will need all the diplomatic skills it can muster to ensure the smooth passage of laws through the Majlis.

Has plutocratic politics given way to party politics?

The conventional wisdom till August this year was if one had enough 500 rufiyaa notes to distribute on Election Day, one was assured of victory. This doctrine however came for a severe hammering almost overnight with the lukewarm response Qasim Ibrahim received for his presidential bid. All of a sudden one started hearing comments such as, 'Qasim is a good businessman and philanthropist, but not the type of person we want as president." Does this herald a paradigm shift from the plutocratic politics of the past decade to party based politics?

According to conventional wisdom, businessmen could dominate politics because Maldivians can be bought for a few rufiyaas. This however may not be the case. The real explanation could be that in the days prior to the formation of political parties, only government officials and businessmen had the resources to conduct campaigns in the atolls. Before 1999, only civil servants with government blessing were allowed to campaign and so they won nearly all Majlis seats. After that, particularly during the last Majlis elections, officially everyone was allowed to campaign, but practically only rich businessmen could make use of the opportunity. That's how we saw the entry of the likes of Jaufar, Waheed, Shaheed Zaki, Thasmeen, Nazim, Hamza, Nashid, Shyam, Jabir and Zahir into the Majlis.

Even during the 2005 election, it could have been the ability to campaign and take the message to the electorate that made all the difference, rather than the actual money that passed hands. Now with the entry of political parties, there is an alternative method of financing election campaigns, other than spending one's personal wealth. Going by the experience of countries like the US, parties appear to be the more sustainable and effective method out of the two. The utter failure of billionaire Ross Perot in election after election is a good case study.

Thus in the future we could perhaps expect a reduction in the number of business tycoons getting elected to the Majlis. This of course is merely a theory and needs verification in light of the results of March 2009 General Election.

[Disclaimer: This article does not purport to prove that businessmen will have no influence on Maldivian politics in the future. After all, political parties are also funded by businessmen. What the article theorizes is a shift in their role from direct financing to party financing. ]