It’s quite true that in the Maldives coalition government does not deliver results. The first coalition government in 2008 following multi-party contest in the popular election aimed to kick-throw Gyyoom out of politics unexpectedly collapsed in early 2012. President Nasheed was forced to walk out of office before even one-third of his political pledge was delivered! Not that a coalition is ineffective but in the Maldives where democracy is still at infancy, a massive coalition such as MUO is highly probable to fall apart soon. Healthy and law-adherence coalition politics could pave way for good governance .
Social Housing Pledge for Tsunami victims NOT DELIVERED FULLY in 2008 Coalition Government
The reality in local politics is majoritarian politics delivers most pledges far better than what Nasheed had desperately managed to import from the self-proclaimed democracy and human rights fathers in the West. Regrettably, Nasheed created more problems than he solved. Decentralization and local governance, Healthcare in the atolls, Infrastructure development and Housing failed not because Nasheed did not work on it. But it was due to opposing views and conflicts in the coalition-led administration at policy level. For example, a popular criticism of President Gyyoom was his failure to rehabilitate tsunami victims. Nasheed pre-electively pledged in 2008 that housing would be solved for all victims of tsunami in most affected islands. About 10,530 people’s housing had been destroyed in the tsunami in 2004. Nasheed himself has had some success in the housing rehabilitation Programme for Hondaidhoo in Hanimaadhoo, for example but most of his plans on rebuilding secure social houses for serious victims went in vain. The reason was some policy conflict and disarray among his top policy makers in social welfare. It’s quite evident a coalition government deliver far less results than what has had been colorfully-pledged in pre-election campaign. The reason is non-adherence to rules & regulations and walking out of “Constitutional Parameters”.
Coalition in 2010 split National Commercial Assets to Foreign Parties
Coalition government would work well where democracy is mature. Democratic strength comes with leadership maturity, sincerity, and willingness to abide by law as well as public awareness & support. The coalition government had walked out of “constitutional and legal borders” in the popular GMR-MACL issue. The only international gateway then in 2010 was “parcel-wrapped” and handed to GMR. As a result, the country has had been paying a heavy “social, financial & development price”! Dhiraagu, and MWSC are two examples whose 100% government control has had been split to foreign companies. Law is partially applied in such massive coalition governments!
No “Parcel-Wrapped” Handover of National Assets Please!
The MUO coalition has to promise they will not “parcel-wrap” Velaana International Airport to GMR, and not auction national commercial assets such as Dhirggau, MWS, and STO. The MUO candidate Ibrahim Mohamed Solih pledges to make “special changes” to STO and MIRA. But he backtracked on explaining those “special changes”. Corruption cases such as FPID was not investigated by Riyaasee Commision setup by Nasheed to “deep-dive” into misuse of government assets and national wealth by President Gyyom who now has a “Political hand-shake” with MUO.
“Walking-out” of Constitutional and Legal Boundary
The collapse of coalition government in 2008 is clear indication of non-willingness to empower Law & Order even when the Supreme Court issued 3 Orders to release a sitting judge, Judge Abdulla of criminal court. Judge Abdulla was kidnapped by the coalition government on “certain allegations” but those “suspect allegations” were not subject to judicial inquest and Judge Abdulla was not tried in a court of law.
What Maldivians WANT, not EXPECT
MUO must strengthen law adherence, sincerity, and policy management for the benefit of all, not only a few in desperate need of “profiting pockets”. A massive coalition would work well only where democracy is mature. So can we really trust a crowd with documented immediate history of “Law-repellancy” ?
Nasreena's Diary 