We are undergoing a major upgrading work for this web site. It may take close to a week to complete this work. Until then updates will not be available. Apologise for the inconvenience this has caused. Meanwhile all members will be emailed with a link to access the new website which would enable you to view and monitor how the work progresses. Please email your comments on features of the new website for improvement to thegoodgovernor@hotmail.co.uk
.

Thank You

GOODGOVERNOR

Structuralism considers the prospect of political change in association with the structure of the social system. It emphasises democratisation as the establishment of the political condition needed for the modernised and industrialised society. Democratisation is said to be an indication of the breakdown of feudal system of economic and social representation towards the inclusion of previously under represented minority groups. Structural theory believes that democratisation is inevitable over time due to development of the society, technological advancement and innovations and the emergence of the new world order. Theorists such as Marx, Webber, and Ann Durkinham have argued about the relationship between capitalist industrialisation and political democracy.  Structural democratisation approach is said to have started during the structural changes of Western Europe’s transformation from an agrarian to industrialise societies. This is highlighted by Seymour Martin Lipset and Barrington Moore. Economic development and accumulation of wealth is said to be the structuralise proposition for democratisation. The theory according to Larry Diamond is shown to be a dominant factor in formation of democracies in the developing world. Political change through developments in socio economic structures is said to have both advantages and disadvantages. In the political process of democratisation, the development of internal structures of the country is argued to be a necessity. Structural analysis is said to be the best way of explaining democratisation and regime consolidation in countries that have gone through the modernisation process. However, the theory is problematic as there are countries in the developed world that are fine through structural transformations both slow and rapid but failed to undergo democratisation.
 
Structural theories consider democratisation as the political expression of the social order of modern society. Democratisation is described as the break down of feudal system of economic production and aristocratic social status. Democracy works towards inclusion of minority groups and under represented people. It is about the inclusion of the excluded. Democratisation is a product of industrialisation, globalisation and technical advancement of the modern world. Democratisation is necessary for the market base social relations and formation of the new one world society. Democratisation is the key to manage the liberal and materialistic transformation of the world. The strategist view is due to industrialisation, globalisation economic development and urbanisation the people’s awareness and education is maximised. Opportunities for academic achievement and for accumulation for personal wealth make democratisation likely. This is indicated in the high levels of democracy in the developed in world and the low level of democratic prevalence in the developing world.

Structuralism believes socio economic stability as the driving for democratisation. Strong authoritarian regimes are maintained in countries with low socio-economic backgrounds. In explanation of democratisation, structuralism emphasises on long term democratic change. The idea that transformation of the state through class conflict emphasises changing structure of power. The explanation is that there are many different ways that countries can undergo development and shape the class structure, individual groups. It also argues that change in economy and development of the country can ultimately lead to conflict between class divisions or hierarchies that exist in the society. This again can bring political change into the system. This is important in determining whether a strong authoritarian regime will give into the installation of democratic governance. Structuralism believes in collective action and emphasises in the long term.

Structuralism is criticised for the long term approach it takes. Its emphasis on history and development are simply no lo longer seen as appropriate as for a company to develop it could take a long time, specially in poor countries it is unlikely for political changes to occur any time soon as development is a very slow process. Robert Dahl considers that it is simply delusional to believe that a country can change in the number of ways needed to develop a democracy in a short amount of time. The process of democratisation is described as too complex as formation of class or groups who share the same interest for democratisation can take a long time and involve a series of steps. The process is as complex as establishment of a new political system

Since September 2003 Maldives has been undergoing dramatic changes. In the same year, November 2003, Gayyoom got elected as President for the fifth term. But for the president it was never the same as his earlier five-year four terms. His opponents, mostly former elites and members from past dynasties of Maldivian monarchs, became better organized against him. Their underground movements were more widened with support from foreign friends in UK, Australia, New Zealand, USA, India and Sri Lanka. Taking advantage of some unfortunate incidents, loopholes in the governing system, constitutional and institutional weaknesses with unlimited power bestowed on the president by the constitution it was easy to portray Gayyoom to the international community as a human rights violator, a dictator, a tyrant, a despot, an oppressor and so on.

Towards end of 2004 it was thought that Gayyoom’s hold in the country was weakening. Some news papers and political websites even published headlines that said Gayyoom was planning to leave the country with his family. An indication that further confirmed the weakening grip of Gayyoom on the country was the results of Special Majlis elections held in January 2005. Although at the time no political parties were allowed, the government claimed that out of the 42 seats declared, the opposition candidates won no more than 12 seats. While the Sri Lanka-based MDP claimed that they won 18 seats. A remarkable victory for the opposition that surprised many and confused the international community was the election of two opposition candidates Ibrahim Ismail and Mohamed Shihab, beating two of Gayyoom’s supporters in Male’ that included the fisheries minister Abdullah Kamaaluddheen. The international community thought it was a clear indication that people are changing, Gayyoom is loosing grip, although the fact of the matter is, it is quite traditional that critics of government get elected to Male’ seats.

Another incident that showed signs of the weakening president and the growing power of the opposition was the election of a speaker for the Majlis. Traditionally the speaker was elected by show of hands. Some of the special Majlis members rejected this tradition citing grounds from the constitution and walked out from the Majlis. Among them was the present speaker of the Majlis Hon. Qasim Ibrahim.  Straight away they walked to the president’s office and demanded to meet the president. They were all given that opportunity.

A further indication of the weakening president was his promises while addressing an invited gathering of 500 Maldivians, on 31st March 2005 at Thiruvananthapuram, India. He promised to introduce multi party democratic system within one year.  He also said he was willing to relinquish his powers as head of the judiciary.

One would say, perhaps, the weakest day of Gayyoom during that period was the day he bargained a 31 point proposals with the Maldivians. That was in mid February 2005; he presented these proposals for constitutional amendments and had requested the Special Majlis to complete its recommendations within a year.  Main highlights of those proposals were:

         • Elect president directly
         • Judiciary Independent of President
         • Gender equality in the election (allow female candidates run for presidency)
         • Limit the Presidency to two terms of five years
         • To create an office of Prime Minister
         • Abolish the system of appointed members in the parliament
         • Elections of Speaker and Deputy Speaker from among the elected members
         • Allow to form and function political parties
         • Provide for the posts of Auditor General and Commissioner of Elections
         • Reform of the penal system

Just about two years from that time, many things have changed. Today, Honorable Qasim who walked out from the Majlis in protest and defiance of voting with show of hands is the Special Majlis Speaker, plus the Finance Minister, other than a president he is the first person whose signature is on the country’s legal tender. Ibrahim Ismail who won Male’ seat in the Special Majlis election for MDP has resigned from the party and is attempting to form his own political party. Dr. Mohamed Waheed, former shadow cabinet Minster of MDP, a potential candidate for 2008 Maldives presidential election, distanced from MDP activities and criticized the party’s ‘revolutionary and militant philosophy’. Recently (May 2007) released Evidence Report by British House of Commons Foreign Affairs Committee on South Asia stated “the opposition (with the Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) in the vanguard) initially refused to co-operate and called for public protests to remove Gayyoom from power”, perhaps a statement in favor of Gayyoom.

The weakening president’s changing face seemingly indicates that he is coming back. The sluggishness of the Special Majlis members will be responsible for the return of a dictator. The Special Majilis has not seriously engaged itself on the various issues proposed by Gayyoom. While Gayyoom has on record said that he cannot push the Majilis beyond a point to accelerate the proposals. It is high time for all political parties and their representative members in the Majlis to contribute positively to the work of revising the constitution. This will be a shorter way to ensure holding a free and fair presidential election in 2008. Don’t disappoint the people who elected you.

+++++++++
 

Politics and democracy can only be contextualised by looking at the factors that has shaped and formed these countries to become what they are now. The features can only be explained by looking at the internal and external environment of those countries. Haynes (1988) states that as well as the social and economic situation the political establishment of the countries are shaped by number of things. There are many reasons why small island developing countries face particular problems. Smallness is associated with many negative consequences.

Overextended personnel, small spare/reserve capacity, few specialists attracted or retained, inadequate compensation level, inappropriate and infrequent training, low turnover rate, small establishment, limited promotion and mobility, limited alternative employment, low morale and motivation, low job satisfaction, low productivity, low adaptability to changing conditions, shortage of management skills, low problem-solving capacity, high level of fear and frustration, absenteeism, weak decision making, continued systemic uncertainty, low level of innovativeness and entrepreneurship, excessive routine dependence small size inhibiting the realization of rational-legal management systems are a list of  issues that are part and parcel of being small. In addition to this according to Baker (1992) there are so few opportunities for educated people outside the public sector, that this can encourage a tendency to say what is necessary to keep the job. Conservatism, caution, procrastination, and bureaucratization may easily result from these situations where, often, 30 percent of the working population works for the government.

Lack of trained manpower Skill shortage is another factor that course proper development in the political field. In a small country, there must exist in absolute terms a small pool of skilled persons to perform the indispensable, key roles of the public service. Most researchers who have had experience in the workings of a microstate can recall certain individuals who had unique skills in the context of that country. The relative shortage of skills is then further exacerbated by the tendency to proliferate the number of horizontal and vertical divisions within the public service, in accordance with inherited and emulates gory practice, in pursuit of the norms of “what an administration looks like.” In addition to maintaining the basic functions of a public service, all truly sovereign small developing states have to uphold the extremely expensive trappings of sovereignty such as UN membership, the diplomatic corps, some defense posture, and so on. Furthermore, because skilled personnel are so scarce, key persons must perform a broad range of functions, thereby diffusing their attention. In this vein Murray observed a “blurring of job descriptions, often of a quite radical nature between policy and administrative, public and private, public and parasitical board membership; Baker (1992).
 
Furthermore there is a scarcity of manpower and technical personnel in these governments to perform new, complex functions of national development because of the small size of the population, the difficulties of recruiting and maintaining qualified personnel in view of the scarce financial resources of the public sector and the consequent low levels of the salaries; the difficulties of educating the officials to perform tasks requiring scientific and technical knowledge in view of the lack of opportunities for higher education, and the problem of retaining them when educated or trained externally. They tend to migrate to the larger, developed countries in which they have wider professional horizons, better remuneration for their work and better amenities for them and their families

Social factors are a constant hindrance in the small knitted population of developing countries. Interpersonal relationship.  Kelly (1995) states the network of personal relationship that exists in small states can hasten complicate and obstruct the communication process. The nature of personal relationship means close contact. Senior officials can be met or accosted through official or unofficial channels and they themselves may use un-othorordox approaches with those they wish to meet. In small states it is impractical to separate personality from function since; quite simply, officials have to interact with their constituents as neighbors, relatives, and friends to a much higher degree. In this context, it would seem that officials are in a climate strongly conducive to unavoidable partiality. In a small society the personalized and multiplex nature of human relationships makes it extremely difficult for partiality to be absent. There is the difficulty of maintaining anonymity. If a difficult, unpopular decision has to be made in the national interest, all may know who is responsible. In a small environment, this may have repercussions in the individual civil servant’s life. In tiny societies, all members of the public are a kind of extended family; networks of influence extend everywhere. To secure advances, the civil servant must tread a cautious path.

Social cohesion and community tension is a coexisting factor that course problems for politics and democratic governance. Kelly (1995) argues that small island nations often have strong social cohesion. She states that division that does occur can take a long time to heal. Friendships, family loyalty and community pressures can interfere with decisions and implementation process. Sometimes rivalry created by different of opinion and wishes can lead to the boycott of useful activities consequently limiting the development potential and causing waste of resources. On this issue Baker (1992 state that to a much greater extent than elsewhere, public officials are personally identified with the consequences of each decision, which puts those officials under great personal pressure. The problem has to be faced of how such officials can avoid having to assume a brokerage role for the community or interest group from whom they come. It is difficult for the public servant to hide behind the rule book or blame the consequences on “the politicians,” “the government,”. Decisions made or enacted by public officials are much more pervasive in such systems than might be the case in a larger context. “I was only doing my job” carries little weight under these circumstances. “You let us down” does.

So struggling with issues of democracy and proper political conduct is an issue that is common in small island developing countries. For this reason discursive approach in every issue is the most affective way forward. Healthy dialogue, discussion engagement and representation of different levels groups of society in the dialogue are another important factor to overcome the issues and move towards democratic politics.

On the12th August 2005, the Chairperson of Maldivian Democratic Party, Mr. Mohamed Nasheed was arrested. According to many analysts this was actually expected and wanted by Nasheed and his associates, in order to be evidence for the oppressive manner of Gyyoom’s government in the Maldives. Nasheed’s expectations were met easily as he attempted to lead a demonstration with the excuse to mark the anniversary of the previous years ‘crackdown’ on a gathering at Jumhooree Maidaan. Soon he was arrested and kept in detention for over ten days.

Immediately following the arrest of Nasheed, police and military personnel raided the MDP Haruge (a shed for members gathering), and reportedly confiscated sharp objects and iron bars which the government claimed could be used as weapons. The government justified the raid as due to information that MDP was planning to overthrow the government using violent means and the ‘weapons’ were to be used to attack police and public structures. 

Following the arrest of Nasheed, initially the government sources said that Nasheed had been taken into custody for his own safety. However, soon people learned otherwise, that the government was planning to charge him under terrorist laws. Nasheed was to be tried under Article 6 (b) with reference to 2 (g) which refers to “any act or attempt to commit an act that may instill fear among the people or threaten life or person or property of any person verbally or in writing.”

This came as a shock to the opposition, public and many others who took interest in the Maldives democratization process, mainly because Nasheed was being charged for seemingly unrelated offences and not for acts for which he was taken into custody. Supporters of opposition MDP became hopeless and disappointed, yet more determined by taking the issue at its face value. Yes, punishment on charges under terrorism offences can be a term between ten and fifteen years and it was thought that Gayyoom was intended at eliminating one major threat to his government. In fact,  had Nasheed been convicted under Maldives terrorism act Gayyoom could have succeed in doing so, at least to a certain extent, perhaps to a short period of time. International community and the opposition expressed their concern over this action of the government and mostly branded this as “an outrageous act by the government”.

The most important role in relation to this issue was played by the media, both opposition and government. Media was vigilant swift in promoting the views of each side leaving the public confused and sending mixed signals to the international community. At the time government media alleged Nasheed of inciting hatred against the state in his speeches during MDP rallies and his trips to outer islands. The opposition media denied these allegations and was active in improving their PR with external agents in the international community. According to opposition reports, Nasheed just sat down in the Jumhooree Maidaan Square with the demonstrators when the Police moved to arrest him. The demonstrators protested and the Police cracked down on them with tear gas. Some reports said that the number of demonstrators sitting with Nasheed were more than 800 although State media and other political websites and news papers showed that Nasheed was sitting with only 5 0r 6 others. However, many analysts believe that the arrest of Nasheed on that day was a strategically planned move by MDP where they have successfully exploited the opportunity to elevate their status and promote their case in  international arena. 

Although the government took its first step towards multi party democracy in the same year, 26 June, 2005, by allowing the Maldivian Democratic Party to be registered as a political party, following the arrest of Nasheed, many in the international community and a great majority of the Maldivian public became suspicious of Gayyoom’s promises made in the famous reform speech in 2004. A widely held view in the international community and among critics of Gayyoom at the time was that Gayyoom was simply “playing for time”. He was blamed for unnecessarily raising the public expectation for democracy and then taking turns completely in the opposite direction. These criticisms and condemnations of Gayyoom’s policy towards democratization were due to many reasons. Mostly due to some arbitrary arrests that occurred during the previous year. 

Foreign Minister Dr. Ahmed Shaheed was on an official visit to India during this time, when Nasheed was arrested on 12th August 2005. Dr. Shaheed met Indian Foreign Minister Natwar Singh during that visit (August 11-14, 2005). It was reported that Indian Foreign Minister thanked the government of Maldives for its support to Indian membership of UN Security Council and Co- sponsorship of the G4 resolution. Furthermore, during his visit Dr. Shaheed gave a special Interview to the Hindu Correspondent; some of the highlights of that interview are as follows:

1) Government Priorities:
     a) to build free institutions that are required to support a functioning multiparty    democracy
     b) revised electoral system, 
     c) free press
     d) Independent judiciary.
2) Government is committed:
     a) to improve its human rights record
     b) to democracy
     c) to make sure that law and order is respected by all parties
3) Government Concerned:
     a) for extremism from religious groups
4) Assurances:
     a) Government has no intent to perpetuate the status quo
     b) Gayyoom’s intent is to create as his legacy a functioning democracy

For a fact MDP Chairperson was freed, however, it requires to take a stock of the reform process to determine on how far we have achieved on those areas that Foreign Minister, Dr. Shaheed had identified.

++++++++

In December 2004 Tsunami caused tremendous damage to the Maldives’s economy; the President said that the disaster set the country back by many years, in development efforts. The country had been restoring the lives and livelihoods of the people, rebuilding damaged homes and infrastructure across the country over the past two and a half years.

Shahuru in his blog post ‘Our seas; a blessing and a curse’ at http://www.razuwa.com, through sea swells that cased extensive flooding in many parts of the country on 15th of May 2007, suggests that disasters have also occurred in the past and have survived; that today when we make money from our seas and when we receive more international support and donations, the government should at least implement a nation wide survival skills program as a national priority; what to do during winds, rains, tidal waves and tsunamis. 

When it is crisis that leads to disaster, crisis management program will include or exclude this aspect of survival skills or anything to do with it, will it not?

Earie predictions of New Orleans flood ‘Gone with the Water’ National Geographic October 2004 shows crisis no “surprise”, (Photo in man’s hand shows a predicted state of New Orleans – presented in an article written one year previous).

May it be health crises, technology failure, commercial crises, economic crises, legal crises, political crises, environmental crises, and social-cultural crises; if cost of dealing with is to supersede available resources, facing a predicted or otherwise potentially predictable crises head-on is a plausible scenario in the case for the Maldives that lack resources and much alternative.

A more intrepid question to us all is how do we know if our Maldives is already provisioned to be gone with the Water sometime in the near future?

I was trying to tune the Radio to get a better reception of radio Maldives, in my home in my island in 1983. My parents and some of the neighbours were there waiting with excitement; to listen to the radio broadcasting of the Maldivian president’s speech after he took the oath of the presidential chair for the second term. Reception of Radio Maldives was very poor then. “Even though the reception is bad, our president Maumoon’s voice is normally very clear”, said my father, the rest of the group agreed with him.

It was true; Maumoon prepares his speeches using simple and understandable words especially out of consideration for the general public. It brings a convincing power to his speeches and the people believe and trust every word uttered by the president those days. It is also one of the reasons why Maldivian’s love to hear his voice and follow his directives in all areas of their life without a doubt.Just in time the radio Maldives got a better reception. Maumoon started his speech with Bismi and Hamdhu Salwaaiy, He was the person who introduced the custom of reciting such long Hamdhu Salawaaiy at the beginning of speeches. This became very popular among the country as 100% of the country is Muslim and is another reason why people loved Maumoon their president with such devotions.

As he continued his speech people were quietly listening to each and every word. Maumoon was delivering the speech for accepting the president’s chair for the second term. He was explaining the reason why he decided to become the president a second time. First reason for becoming the president is, the beloved citizens of the country offered him the job once again, and it was difficult for him to say no and disappoint them by rejecting their request. Second, he started a number of great development projects, during his first five year term of government, which needed a bit of more time to complete. So another five years in this sense was very important to achieve the objectives he has started working on.
People sitting around me looked at each other. The expressions on their face showed the happiness inside. They were happy because their beloved president was going to run the country for them for another 5 years. Even if it wasn’t his desire to be a president for second term running. He was accepting the presidency for the people, because he never wanted to let the Maldivian down. So the comments in the circle of listeners were, “How great is he, he loves us more then himself and the Maldivian needs are his top priority in life. So with his love and dedication for our people and our country; he is obviously the most capable person to be the president for us”.

Maumoon was the most capable person for the presidential chair when he was elected for the first time. He and his team were the most educated and most enthusiastic group in the Maldives at that time. So Maumoon geared the country’s development in such a fast speed. Considering island development, spreading education for all, and developing heath care system he brought huge changes in his first term in office. That was one of the reason he won the next election by nearly 99% of the public vote.

As Maumoon spent more and more time in  power he brought more and more members of his family and friends to the influential posts of the government. For the presidential regime it became a necessity for maintaining those families and friends expensive life style and it became difficult to say good bye to those privileges. Eventhough Maumoon is simple kind good hearted and as an individual with caring nature he was easily exploited by his freinds and family often without his knowldge. That was the time Maumoon out of sheer necessity for the selfish fullfillment of those people had to compromise to keep power in a diffrent context from what he intially presided.  That was the time for Maumoon he has out of sheer necessity for the selfish fulfilment of those people who does not really care for his image, he has to compromise to keep the power in a different context from what he initially presided. That is been the president became rather than sincerity an orientation of keeping the circle of selfish friends and such family members happy.

This became obvious during 1990’s freedom of press crises. The famous magazine Sangu and some other news papers criticised Maumoon’s government officials of those with Mamumoon has long established relation of corruption and abuse of power. But Maumoon was left with no option but keep the groups quite and managed to get public support for another five years. That support still continues as Maumoon is still very much the same man with those personality traits that can flourish with the presence of a transparent dedicated and most of all honest polity. People can understand that Maumoon is taking the necessary steps of getting rid of the negatives and bringing in the positives thus this courage’s move is helping Maumoon to grow from strength to Strength.

Today although the situation of the country is different obviously there is a number of opposition parties and all of them are trying harder to put Maumoon’s regime down. And their most famous words are that Maumoon is in a sinking ship. But the question is when is Maumoon’s ship going to sink or will it sink?

Whether Maumoon’s ship is going to sink or reach a new brighter and safer destination; is a matter we cannot easily resolve yet. However one thing for sure is the turns and twists in Maumoons journey will be clear very soon. So far from what is happening some conclusion can be drawn.  Maumoon is preparing for the turns and twists that are around the corner. Actions he has taken to tackle the future shows to pass the leadership of the country to one of his children is not something Mamuoon is contemplating. He is also not seeking a solution by passing it to his relatives or other family member for several personalities for consideration failed him and disappointed him big time. The last such well known case been Yameen means this line of theory is impossible. The ultimate conclusion is Maumoon is definitely getting ready to hand over power to a person other than himself. But now the decision is very much citizen oriented as every action shows  that a  public figure who the Maldivian support as their president, and one who can guarantee better  security and protection for himself and his family is getting recruited.  This last and final act of Maumoon is conducted purely by himself without an ounce of influence by anybody with a focus towards completing his journey as a president of Maldives in the way he wanted. So coming to the question Is Maumoon’s ship sinking Maumoon is, never has been in a sinking ship. Maumoon is still very much in control of his own ship and in making decision of how he want his ship to be built, anchored and travelled to. 

In the Maldives for example recently the unidentified boat with artilleries; without any one taking responsibility for the action is a serious terrorist act that had the potential to be a danger for the Maldivians. It is a what if situation where we can say what if that boat was in our waters to attack Maldives just the way they did on the 3rd of November 1988 and killed beloved Maldivians like us. The news also made me remember that night going on my bicycle for Girl Guide Practice for 11th November celebration; without knowing that the sound from the background was gunshots fired by foreign mercenaries. Then approached by a man with a gun near Kibigasdhosuge, asking me to get off my bike, and get into the house next door. We should acknowledge our ultimate saviour from that nightmare with deadly consequences was none other than our neighbouring country India. So shared control of boarder is something that Maldives as a small very vulnerable country in so many ways need at the moment and we should look into it. Our country I happily acknowledge has such relations established with neighbouring India and as well as in the past, with the last incidence it has been proved beneficial. Being as proud as peacocks with the kind of power we have alone; will not guarantee our security with threat as such, so formally establishing such a relation ship as shared sovereignty over border patrol is of strategic importance for the current Maldives situation.

One of the major foreign policy challenges of the current time, according to Kramer is how to encourage the development of well-functioning polities that provide security, social services, and opportunities for economically remunerative work. Democracy, a system of governance that allows citizens to express their views and, more importantly, hold government officials accountable for their actions, is the most effective although not the only way to achieve and sustain such a polity. The most important determinants of democratic development have been underlying socioeconomic conditions and institutional changes initiated by strategically calculating political elites. In countries that suffer from some combination of internal trouble (like our current internal political power struggle), poverty, limited governmental capacity, or a scarcity of moderate institutions even if elections take place, the prospects for developing full-fledged democracy based solely on domestic resources and actors are poor and the vicious enticements generated by the current international environment often make matters worse. To promote better governance up to and including democracy, policy makers need effective tools. The apparatus now on hand, regrettably, consists mostly of governance assistance and intermediary administration, neither of which has proven particularly successful in getting out of the current situation faced in the political front of Maldives. Shared control would be a promising addition to the available set of policy options. Shared control and assistance entities are not uncommon in the countries of the world. It is typical for less capable countries to depend on external actors such as another state or a regional or international organization or a better developed country. Maldives doing so is of strategic importance in order to deal with any outside threat as all our attention at the moment is immersed in the political transition process.

Shared control could contribute to better governance and democracy as well. Kramer state that for countries that surface from political conflicts as Maldives hopefully will be soon; sufficiently enough to hold elections that create internationally recognized and internally legitimated national authorities, shared control could mean a chance to restrain new political structures with more expertise, better tuned policies, and guarantees against abuses of power. In illiberal democracies, endorsing shared arrangements could be a way for political candidates to commit themselves credibly to better governance. More generally, shared security in vulnerable areas could make greedy behaviour by national and local public officials harder as they know there is a big brother looking after the country. Dreams of vast wealth vying for political power according to Kramer makes politician take dangerous courses. Once all relevant group of actors recognize that breaking through the barrier will bring dangerous consequences the threat of such behaviour towards ownership of the country decreases. Not only in the security front but also in the political reforms process a temporary alliance of less calibre with an experienced country or an institution can help the Maldives. This is the kind of things we need to seek as a country to develop the country towards fitting the 21st century framework.

I would like to call on our government to bring an  IDEA consultant to Maldives in order to train our Special Majlis members in the Art of Constitution Making. It is not an ordinary process and it needs professional knowledge. Thus our members are in dire need of such training, for a smooth transition to  finishing the building process. Getting such training by IDEA is very common in every part of the world. Even in Asia.

At the moment we have only one person who has done an IDEA run workshop. She also only did a short training course run by IDEA in Thailand last year. That trainee was Lubuna Zahir Hussain. Lubuna participated in an IDEA held two-week training seminar from 24 July to 4 August 2006 in Bangkok, Thailand; it was just a two week training workshop to train trainers to conduct training for others who participate in constitutional reforms.

In an interview she gave to IDEA staff afterwards she mentioned the desperate need for such training for the Maldivian constitution making members like her. She also mentioned the desperate need we have for such resources (in terms of written literature) about the subject of constitution making in Maldives. She said she is going to share the file with the rest of the  members. Rather than a brief training to conduct training on such a complex subject by one of the parliament members, it would be good if the government get a consultant to come to Maldives to conduct a proper first hand training. The task at hand can be made a lot easier to the members. Previously I my self put a lot of blame on the members, and quite frankly, now I realise that their performance should not be blamed in the absence of such support systems they need. Their lack of development is also to be blamed on lack of Knowledge; awareness and experience. Perhaps the serious complications and tension can be minimised by learning about the process by experts.

IDEA at the moment is helping our neighbouring South Asian country, Nepal in constitution reform process. IDEA’s Nepal programme is with the aim; to support a peaceful, inclusive and participatory constitution building process which can lay the foundation for a sustainable democracy. More specifically, by providing comparative experiences, IDEA aims to build capacity of participants in the political process and to promote discussions that lead to the development of a consensus on constitutional issues. This is been done in collaboration with UNDP and I am sure UNDP will be more than willing to help in anything that will speed up the reforms in Maldives as the likes of Organisation has started severely criticising the slow pace of development.

At the moment according to IDEA Maldives including Nepal is one of the five countries that have being involved in the constitution building process. IDEA states that Constitutions are the fundamental building blocks of democracy. They define the policy, they set the rules of the relationship between the state and its citizens; they fix and reflect the social contract that underpins the functioning of an organized society. At the moment Constitution-building is an  essential part of the roadmaps to peace and democracy. So to make our road map a success we should seek IDEA help for our Majlis members to perform effectively.

The Leader of Liberal Democrats Sir Menzies Campbell following the initial communication with his Correspondence Manager, Anne-Marie Bunting; contacted one of our representatives  MS Haulath Mohamed by e-mail and expressed his serious concern over the state of the victims affected by the Tidal Waves. He stated that it is a situation to be considered as an issue worthy of immediate attention. Thus in order to bring some official attention to the situation the case has been assigned to the Liberal Democrat Spokesperson for Foreign Affairs MP Michael Moore. The Liberal Democrats are one of the main Political Parties in the UK.

Since the series of Tidal Waves hit Maldives and caused destruction among the islands of Maldives GOODGOVERNOR representatives in the UK  have been campaigning for getting international media, external governments and political parties attention to the suffering of the Maldivians. In a bid to divert attention to the state of the people affected, and an attempt for directing aid to the victims in Maldives, our members has worked hard. They have spend hours contacting Major News channels such as Sky News, BBC, CNN, Political parties in the UK and EU.

BBC acknowledged what is happening in Maldives and over the telephone expressed their concern and said the best they could do to help is to get their Asian Network do a programme highlighting the destructions and victims situation in order to get charities and media attention. (Photos: Top right: Sir Menzies Campbell; Below: MP Michael Moore).