What Next in Thimarafushi?

One hopes that nothing more happens in Thimarafushi, now that the election results have been declared, giving Mohamed Mustafa of the ruling Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) a narrow victory margin of 50 votes. Further litigation is unlikely to change the ground reality and will only vitiate the atmosphere further.

The most Ghassan Maumoon could hope for from taking the matter to the court would be nullify Mustafa's candidacy based on an old court case. If that happens many people in the constituency, particularly in Thimarafushi would feel cheated.

Whatever the truth, many Thimarafushi citizens nurse a long standing grudge that their island –the thickest populated in the area –has never had representation in the Majlis because of widespread vote rigging.

But today it is the moment of their victory. "I am very happy. This victory belongs to the people of this island and the history of this island is changing," an islander told Minivan News. "Because we have a lot of development plans. An airport, city hotels and a yacht marina."

So let the islanders enjoy their revelry and dreams while they last.

[Title photo from http://myislandthimarafushi.blogspot.com/]

What is at Stake for MDP and DRP in Thimarafushi

In a 'raazuvaa' (Maldivian Chess) challenge match, the player who wins the last three games swaggers away in triumph, irrespective of how many rounds were played earlier and who won them. Winning the Thimarafushi seat in the re-poll scheduled for 11 July would give MDP a raazuvaa type chance to walk away like a winner, despite the setbacks it suffered in the main Majlis elections.

For DRP on the other hand, a defeat for Ghassan, scion of their beloved 'Zaeem,' at the hands of Thimarafushi Mustafa, more famous till now as a sea cucumber merchant, is unthinkable. DRP revolves around Zaeem and Ghassan is his anointed successor.

Earlier, the High Court of Maldives had annulled the results of the two ballot boxes polled in Thimarafushi on 9^th May, citing the prevailing atmosphere, which in its opinion was not conducive to a free and fair election. The Court ordered a re-poll be conducted after establishing a more ambient atmosphere. This has left the two main candidates gunning for each other.

Miadhu Daily reports that Mustafa believes some people had spread stories and created confusion and doubts on the situation in Thimarafushi on Election Day. He says these stories were spread after Ghassan was sure of defeat. Mustafa also claims he has information that DRP is sending a group of gangsters to destabilize Thimarafushi and cause unrest.

In the meanwhile, Ghassan Maumoon has told DhiTV that the atmosphere in Thimarafushi is still not conducive for free or fair voting. He said election commission members and a large number of police officers must remain on the island to ensure peaceful and calm voting. Ghassan also complained that he had not been given the opportunity to hold a rally in the island.

Mustafa's chief weapon against Ghassan appears to be to raise chauvinistic feelings in Thimarafushi, playing on the fact that Ghassan is from Male. Ghassan's tactic appears to be to appeal to the youth by emphasizing Mustafa's age, calling him Mustafa Bey, which in Dhivehi has a double meaning (elder brother/old man).

According to an analyst, going by the results (not officially released) of the valid vote boxes in Guraidhoo, Gaadhiffushi and elsewhere, Ghassan has a lead of approximately 260 votes in hand. Mustafa needs to gain two thirds of the Thimarafushi vote to cover this deficit and win. This is not as difficult as it seems because Mustafa had earlier gained that much and more in the canceled results.

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.
  

What Happens after the Elections?

The following Mullah Nasruddin story gives a clue to what will happen in the aftermath of the general elections slated for May 9:

When Mullah undercut the local donkey merchant's prices for the third week in succession, the merchant was worried. "I don't know how you offer lower prices than mine. I use my slaves' free labor. They steal fodder from neighbors to feed my donkeys. So how do you keep your costs lower?"

"Simple," Mullah replied, "you steal labor and fodder. I steal donkeys."

In this story substitute 'merchant' with one of the political parties and 'Mullah' with another party. Also substitute 'labor' with campaign effort and 'fodder' with monetary gifts. And yes, I forgot, 'donkeys' with members (the pun is not intended).

Like the merchant some parties are spending on 'labor' and 'fodder'. But the smart parties are waiting for the election to be over to buy the elected members. As Mullah would have said, this is a much more cost effective method of stealing the public mandate.

So how will the whole thing end? This could depend on what is on offer. Let's sum this up in poker terms. If independents have a Full House, then DRP has Four of a Kind. But it's MDP that holds the Royal Flush.

How Genuine are the Candidates?

No one has so far said they are standing for the election because of the 62,000 rufiyaa salary. We don’t even expect them to admit it, but at least for some candidates the salary must be a big issue. It’s really a funny situation. The candidates as well as the voters know that election promises will remain just that: promises and nothing else.

Most candidates claim their reason for standing for a particular constituency is because they know the place well. However, in most cases the truth is that the candidate lives in Male and has no contact with the home island except for occasional visits during the Eid Holidays. The real reason to choose the constituency could more likely be to take advantage of the presence of relatives in the island.

When a candidate is asked what they will do for the constituency, they usually come up with long lists of projects including schools, harbors and resorts. Realistically speaking Majlis members will have no direct influence on decisions to build such infrastructure, since they come under the purview of the executive branch of the state.

Few candidates appear to concentrate on the actual role of Majlis members and their realistic contribution to the process. But if the voters are happy with what the candidates say, who are we to complain?

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.

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.

FLASHBACK: The Math – A few scenarios for swinging the votes!

By Ahmed Afaal

On October 11, 2008 I submitted an article on very simple mathematics of the possibilities for swing votes in the second run of the election. In that I made a number of assumptions that would make the suggested scenarios possible.

Usually simple mathematics works. And in this case some assumptions that I made was true.

Voter turnout:

The most important assumption that I made was that voter turnout should be as high as that of the first run. In the first run the total turnout was 176,567 voters. This time around the number in fact was higher at 179,343.

Voter who voted for DRP and MDP at the first round remain constant:

Although this may not be exactly true the following math suggests that it is very close to the assumption. In the first round MDP got 44,293 votes and DRP got 71,731 votes. My calculations were based on 3 scenarios, i.e. 10% swing, 15% swing and 20% swing. I also suggested that it would be difficult to get a 20% swing. (Please read previous article I submitted to this blog for details).

So with a 15% swing my estimated numbers were, 94,889 for MDP and 81,678 for DRP. Of course these numbers are subject to a margin of error. The actual numbers attained are 97,222 for MDP and 82,121 for DRP. For an estimate I would say a close figure. The reason for saying that is if you look carefully, my estimate for a 15% swing resulted in an increase of 12.18% of votes for DRP from the first round. The actual increase is 12.65%. And the rest voted for MDP.

Comments:

I also agree that all the assumptions that I made in the previous analysis may not be true. But what I see here is that it is important that intellectual mathematical analyses are used by the media and even political parties in understanding the real voting scenarios. I encourage that media and political advisors to undertake such analysis during election times so that more objective ideas maybe obtained about the situations at hand.

Though I am not an election statistical expert, I have some academic background on statistics and also worked a large part of my working like producing statistics and using statistics for planning purposes. What I have presented in the October 11^th article and this one are just simple mathematical analysis based on the little statistical experience I have and what I read from the Internet about voting, elections and mathematical analyses elsewhere.

Please do not consider the previous article as well as this article "political" but an intellectual piece of work by an independent (which I am still) citizen of the Maldives.

Note: All figures used for the calculations are taken from the Elections Commission website http://www.elections.gov.mv/)

This analysis was presented by Ahmed Afaal, for the readers of this blog. He has his own blog (No politics) at http://afaal.blogspot.com/. As always I welcome contributions from the readers of this blog, which I will publish for the benefit of other readers and to keep this blog rich in content.

After the Election is over…

Tomorrow there will be a clear-cut winner in Presidential Election 2008 –and a loser. What they do in the next few days, weeks and months will impact not just democracy in the Maldives, but the entire future of the country. How magnanimous will the winner be and how gracious the loser?

The Maldives faces grave economic threats and pressing social issues like drugs, crime and housing shortage. Solving these problems will require sincere bipartisan support. Such cooperation depends a lot on the winner as the head of a responsive government and the loser as the head of a responsible opposition.

The past few months have seen an unprecedented level of mutual recrimination and mudslinging from all sides. Healing hurt feelings and bruised egos will not be easy, but imperative nevertheless. As Martin-Luther King Junior said, "We must learn to live together as brothers or perish together as fools."

Despite the acrimonious campaigns of the past weeks, multi-party democracy is here to stay. For most Maldivians, going back to the party-less days of 'wahudhath', where dissent was equated with rebellion, is simply not an option.

As a nation we have sacrificed so much for reform. Let all sides work together to realize this dream for the sake of our future.

Can we mend the electoral list?

As I was waiting for the girl behind the counter to issue my ballot paper, I overheard the old man behind me in the queue asking whether his name was on the list. From the ensuing conversation I gathered he had gone to another polling station in Henveiru and was told his name was not there. It wasn't there in our polling station either. So the old man, despite being born and brought up in Male and registered in the same Henveiru house all his life and despite having a valid ID card had to go home without voting.

A friend of mine, a 60-year old lady living in Henveiru was luckier. On Election Day morning, she went to the Maafannu polling station where she was guided to go. Her name wasn't there however and she was directed to go to a neighboring station. Fortunately she could vote there.

Another friend, a pre-school teacher, said she had no such problem at all. In fact her name was listed in two different polling stations, one in Galolhu where her father's house is located and one in Machchangolhi where her mother's house is located. Her father's name was also on the list even though he died 13 years ago. She had pointed this out to election officials even last year during the August referendum. But clearly no action has been taken.

There are many anecdotes like this across the Maldives. So obviously there are major problems with the electoral list. Is there a solution to this?

In some countries Election Commissions do not rely solely on national ID cards. Rather they require voters to come and register after supplying proof of citizenship and identity. Even in the Maldives a similar procedure was followed for registering people who wanted to vote outside their home islands. Can we use such a registering process for all citizens to improve the electoral roll?

Maldives has decided, but what?

The results of the first phase of Presidential Election 2008 would have surprised those who thought with their hearts, but perhaps not those who thought with their brains. The most striking result of the election is that Maumoon Abdul Gayoom is still the most popular leader in the Maldives. But this is something that should have been obvious to anyone who analyzed things rationally.

Gayoom is easily the most marketed product in the Maldives with brand recognition almost universal among all age groups from toddlers to oldsters. In each of the 200 odd inhabited islands he has a group of loyal supporters among the island administration and women's development committees who would campaign for him. Even if they manage to recruit 100 voters in each island, the total would up to 20,000 votes. Considering all this, the result is not surprising at all.

The purpose of this article however is not to explain the results, but to analyze what they mean and see if there are any lessons for the second phase. Already the main political parties are staking their claims and counter claims about the results. Let us take some of these claims and see to what extent they are justified.

Is Gayoom the most popular politician?

• This claim of DRP is justified considering the 40.6% votes he polled against 25.1% by his nearest rival.
  


• Part of the reasons for his success is discussed above. The other reason was perhaps other candidates devoted more time on negative campaigning against Gayoom rather than promoting themselves positively. Perhaps there is a lesson in this for Anni in the second round campaign.
  

Are 60% of Maldivians opposed to Gayoom?

• This is not necessarily true. In this poll citizens primarily voted positively for who they thought was best. To take the converse and say all those who did not vote for Gayoom were opposed to him is to stretch the imagination a bit too much.
  


• To illustrate how dangerous it is to interpolate poll results to other situations, let me present a historic example. At the end of 20^th Century, sports journalists and experts voted to decide the all time greatest sports personality. In this poll boxer Muhammad Ali won after beating the likes of Pele, Maradonna and Don Bradman (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/sport/561352.stm). So when it came to the next poll to decide who the boxing all time personality was, one would have thought Muhammad Ali would win easily. But he was beaten to that spot by another boxer, Sugar Ray Robinson (http://www.bbc.co.uk/dna/606/A17665914). This left a very funny situation: Ali was the greatest among ALL sportsmen, but in his own sport boxing he was only second best.
  

If the opposition fielded a unified candidate, would he have won?

• This claim is based on the total of about 60% polled by all opposition candidates. The claim may not necessarily be true. Supposing Anni was the unified candidate, many of Hassan Saeed's Addu supporters may not have voted for Anni. The same could also be true for Adhaalat party supporters who voted for Qasim.
  


• So, Hassan Saeed and Qasim were crucial in chipping away at Gayoom's share of votes. Without that Gayoom could perhaps have gone through in the first round itself. Ironically opposition disunity may have saved the day for them.
  

Will all the 40% who voted for Gayoom in the first round also vote for him the second round?

• This is not necessarily true. The results of the first phase have changed the situation quite radically. For example, for many of the 40% who voted for Gayoom, he was perhaps a towering and impregnable figure, an image that could have played a part in their decision to vote. The first phase results have dismantled that image and now he looks more vulnerable. This could affect the voters negatively.
  


• 
  
  Some of the 40% may have preferred Gayoom because the opposition was bitterly divided in the first round and were quarrelling among themselves. This has changed now and so some voters may re-think their original decision.
  
  
  

  
  

Is Ibra finished as a politician?

• This is not necessarily true. The number of votes he polled is probably not a true indication of his popularity. In this election many voters probably avoided voting for him believing he did not have a winning chance. In a hypothetical one to one context with Hassan Saeed or Qasim, Ibra could spring a surprise.
  

How did Umar outperform a high profile politician like Ibra?

• The reason could be his unique agenda for implementing Sharia law for drug smugglers and other criminals.

What this election is all about

By anonymous visitor to blog

We analyze politics at the same level as kids. And I am surprised that even the so called intellectuals do not fully grasp the picture. As much as some like it to be, the issue in the election is not about Maumoon. It is not even about the election of a president. This election is all about bringing a much desired correction to the system. We are in the process of adjusting to a new equilibrium.

And what is it, you may ask?

The world has changed rapidly in the last 10 years with new technology, internet, mobile phones, cable TV, cheap travel in a tsunami of globalization. We are now part of the global culture, for which we are making the adjustment. This requires a serious upgrade of the political system - you don't do it by blaming Maumoon. In fact Maumoon is not even a factor here.

We are witnessing a global change that demands an equivalent change to our attitudes and lifestyles. Out with the tried, tested and failed methods; and in with the values and aspirations of Generation X.

This is not a time to be nostalgic about past people such as Amin Didi and Nasir. They are also not without their share of blame in maintaining our present feudal power structure.

Power is not about right or wrong. It is about sustainability of the current system, which has been in Maldives for centuries.

Now with globalization and with new rules, even Maldives is forced to change. No one can hold it back.

Question is who is best to lead this. None of the candidates have proven credentials to do this. Who is talking about new technology and new ways of doing things?

Even USA and Europe are changing and adjusting to the new reality. But our learned PhD people are talking of copying their systems which they themselves are questioning now.

Our present situation demands a good statesman who is able to articulate the values and aspirations of our new generation. That is the future.

The future cannot be determined by the values of the middle-aged people, because they are just as clueless as kids.

[Note: This article was submitted by an anonymous visitor to this blog, and so the contents are his/her intellectual property. This blog will consider for publication articles that are constructive, avoid obscene language and do not needlessly launch personal attacks on individuals or communities. Authors of controversial articles are requested to identify themselves.]