:: Dhivehi Observer :: Peoples Press ::

"...the interview was not given by Nasheed. Nasheed had no authority to speak his personal mind on national TV."

Dhivehi Observer, Thursday 29th July 2004

The following is a copy of an email sent by a Maldivian to Mohamed Nasheed regarding the events in the Majlis on the 19th of July and his subsequent television interview on that matter. Mohamed Nasheed's response to the writer's (name withheld on request) queries is published below as is without any changes. The initial email query has been edited for clarity.

----- Original Message -----
From: N****** T*******
To: nasheed@dhivehinet.net.mv
Sent: Sunday, July 25, 2004 8:03 PM
Subject: comment on TV interview

Dear Nasheed,

I would like to mention few words with regard to the interview you gave to TVM. I am just an ordinary Maldivian, I may be wrong in your opinion at this stage but again you might say yes he was right when the time comes right for you, especially when you turns against this regime. But it may become too late for you to win the hearts and minds of this country.

Your interview did not convince the ordinary Maldivian at all, perhaps it may convince the people who want to remain in power as long as they think it is necessary. Your interview seems to trying to justify Hameed rather than explaining the voting system described in the Maldivian constitution. We all agree and believe what you have said but the question arise is why the speaker of Majlis wants to go for show of hands, why wouldn't he go for secret ballot?. This is what the ordinary people of this country are thinking about, today. Now most of the Maldivians know what is right and what is wrong, they have to be convinced through reasonable explanations and more importantly with facts.

People would not have any chance to think it negatively if you have broadcast the SP. Majlis sitting on TV live. The truth is government is trying to hide something from the people, its simple as that. The whole Maldive knows the government have pre-planned to elect Seena Zahir as the president of Sp. Majlis. Hameed had a plan to use the show of hands to elect the SM. To add more flavour to this, the Majlis staffs have also been instructed to write down the names who vote against Mr Zahir. Isn't the whole purpose is to intimidate the members and get the required number of votes to elect Zahir.

Isn't the truth?

What is there for the government to lose by going for secret ballot since the constitution did not mention specifically about the way the vote should be taken. Wouldn't this will be more fairer and the people wouldn't have any chance to have the so called anti government feeling.

Thank you for your patience while reading this email

Aishath

From: "Mohamed Nasheed" <nasheed@dhivehinet.net.mv>
To: "N****** T*******" <a***********@hotmail.com>
Subject: Re: comment on TV interview
Date: Mon, 26 Jul 2004 13:11:12 +0500

Dear Aishath

Thank you very much for taking time to write to me and sharing your thoughts. While I respect the views that you have expressed so clearly, let me also take some time to clarify certain issues here.

First of all, I as a person, as a lawyer, and as a member of this Maldivian Nation, sincerely believe that the chair could have been more accommodating on 19 July. Members should have had the time they wanted to speak and express their views, and at the end of the debate he could have gone for a vote on the two opinions that had been shaped on the Majlis floor. I have worked with the current chair for the past 10 years, and I have not seen a sad day like that.

Secondly, I am a person who has always maintained a very low profile on all events. I have always maintained an impartial and credible disposition with the members. My greatest wealth in my professional career as a lawyer and as a civil servant has been my reputation for impartiality and my courage to say what I feel is right. I have never had the desire or the ambition to win hearts and minds, or fight elections, or to win public office. I am a small commercial lawyer with a modest practice. I am happy with what I am, how I am, and where I am in life. And I am quite taken aback being thrust into public debate and national domain. But I guess, I was at the wrong place at the wrong time.

As regards the interview, I must say that I could only answer the questions that the interviewer had posed to me. Although it was broadcast as a statement, it was in effect responses to questions asked. I was told that there were people saying that the chair had breached the constitution of this country and is guilty of high treason, and that a group of persons had attempted to file a criminal case against the chair on the same charge. I knew that too. I was asked if I could explain what the chair had done in the light of those developments. Naturally I would be speaking from that angle. And I believe this. The chair did not do it right when he said that he wanted to go for a vote when there were members who had requested to speak. I reflected that in the interview. But "not doing it right" does not amount to and does not mean the same as "breach of our constitution".

Further, the interviewer asked what actually was the point of contention amongst members. And I narrated the two prevalent opinions. All of this can be ascertained from the minutes, or the verbatim records of the proceedings of the Majlis. The only thing I went beyond the verbatim records was to explain the reason why the chair said that he did not see it constitutionally required to go for a secret ballot. And as Secretary General I had every authority to convey the Speaker's mind to the public when his act had become a constitutional issue. My personal opinion may not necessarily be the same on the issue. But the interview was not given by Nasheed. Nasheed had no authority to speak his personal mind on national TV.

Why a show of hands and why not a secret ballot? It is a good question. But this a question for politicians, members to decide.

What I could say is this. That day almost all the members who proposed the secret ballot pushed the issue on the basis of Article 133 of the constitution. They spoke as if there were never any other alternative. There were members who said that if the chair went for a show of hands then it would be in violation of a clear cut constitutional provision. Of course there were more modest additional reasons put forward as well such as political privacy in a society where people are close-knit. But the thrust of their whole argument, and the main punch line was the absolute requirement for a secret ballot under 133. And any departure was considered to be a violation of the constitution. That is reflected in the circumstances surrounding the court case as well. Hence the reaction to that also came from the constitutional provisions. And the second opinion was to justify that the secret ballot to elect a President for the Special Majlis was not a constitutional requirement and departure was not a violation of the constitution. Hence the issue hung on that. And the immediate cause for the members to walk out was the chair's announcement that he considered to take a vote on the candidates.

That day, both sides referred to the constitution. Both sides had highly qualified lawyers. Both sides justified their arguments using tools of legal interpretation. Both sides were valid in their approach. On used the literal approach and the other used the purposive approach. In this kind of a situation, it is ideally the Majlis itself who shall decide which opinion shall bind them.

But the secret ballot is still not a completely ruled out option. It is all upto the Majlis members to decide how they still want it to be.

Live broadcast has been an issue that has been submitted by a Member. I have the authority to carry on customary practices. Live broadcast is not customary. And it is done only in very few countries. It has its own good effects and its own ill effects as well. Books have been written and papers have been researched in the parliamentary world on this subject. Only the Majlis can decide on how they want to go forward with this issue. Personally I have no comment to offer.

I hope I have touched base with almost all the issues. It has been a pleasure to respond to you.

Best regards
Nasheed