By the time President Gayoom finally put pen to paper to ratify the Maldives’ new Constitution on August 7th this year, a four year struggle had taken place between the thirty-year dictator and the country’s progressive reform movement.  The President signed a document which significantly reduces his power, handing over greater responsibility to Parliament and a host of new rights and freedoms to the Maldivian people.

Since the first sitting of the Special Majlis (Constitutional Assembly) in 2004, the amendment of the former Constitution had been wrought with difficulty.  Protests, walk-outs and delays across parties characterised the process that many Maldivians thought would never end. However, the Constitution of the Maldives was finally completed on 26th June 2008. Further delay by President Gayoom, in which the document was returned to the Special Majlis for minor changes, meant the ratification of the Constitution did not take place until August, against a backdrop of pressure from the international community.

Once ratified, the Constitution was welcomed by the United Nations, Commonwealth and international community as a significant step forward in the Maldives’ transition to democracy.  The historic changes brought forward by the Constitution – not least the introduction of a multi party system – are on the whole hugely beneficial for citizens.  The massive shake-up reaches to the very foundations of President Gayoom’s thirty year rule, including a separation of powers between the executive, legislative and judicial branches, greatly reducing the authority of the President and government in favour of delegation to relevant judicial and legislative bodies. 

Aside from the separation of powers and introduction of a multi-party system, other changes ensure that if Gayoom is re-elected for a seventh term, he will certainly be unable to continue in the manner to which he has become accustomed.

For a start, under the new Constitution, a President can only serve a maximum of two terms, as in the United States.  Having served six terms already, Gayoom’s candidacy for a seventh term has been placed under question by members of the opposition, with the New Maldives Movement currently seeking legal advice from abroad on the matter, and the Social Liberal Party threatening to take it up with the Supreme Court once established.

However, Gayoom insists on standing and should he win a seventh term, under the new Constitution he will find his power as President over his Cabinet and the People’s Majlis much reduced. All cabinet appointments will have to be endorsed by the Majlis and thus will not permit future heads of state to appoint friends or relatives.  President Gayoom will lose power over the judiciary with the appointment of an independent judiciary, Supreme Court and Prosecutor General.  While he retains the power to declare a state of national emergency, as he did for two fraught months in 2004, the Majlis will be able to overturn his decision should they so vote.

Following the Parliamentary Elections scheduled for March 2009, future heads of state will lose the power to appoint MPs – all will be directly elected by the people in keeping with a new policy of representation based on population. The two MPs per atoll rule is being scrapped in favour of a fairer system in which two MPs will be elected for the first 5,000 citizens on each island, with one further MP chosen for each additional 5,000. This will dramatically increase the number of MPs in the Majlis and ensure a more equitable system of representation for highly populated islands, notably Male’.

In Parliament, the role of MPs becomes more clearly defined with the passing of the new Constitution. MPs will no longer be able to hold other positions which compromise their accountability, such as cabinet minister, civil servant or member of an independent commission. And with the introduction of a multi-party system, and requirements for candidates to disclose funding sources and for parties to conduct internal elections, the number, strength and organisation of political parties will continue to flourish.

On a more personal note, under the new Constitution, the President of the Maldives will have reduced immunity from that which he has previously enjoyed, and will be able to be prosecuted on leaving office.  Furthermore, he and his ministers will be obliged to disclose their assets and can have ‘no active involvement’ in business interests, hence the resignation of several ministers with successful companies in the days leading up to the ratification of the new Constitution.

The changes at the top are accompanied by changes on the ground, with a new tranche of rights and freedoms included in the Constitution.  Particularly relevant to the Maldives’ past, in which peaceful protests against the regime have ended in arrest, detention and often violence by security forces, are the right to freedom of association and a series of rights on arrest. Under the Constitution, citizens have the right to freedom of peaceful assembly without the prior permission of the State and the right to legal counsel and appearance before an independent judge within 24 hours of arrest.

Despite the broad welcome from within the Maldives and by the international community,  one section of the Constitution is eliciting real controversy both inside and outside the country. The ‘citizenship clause’, Clause 9, puts under question the Maldivian citizenship of individuals who are not Muslim. A US NGO, The Institute on Religion and Public Policy, claims that the clause marks a strict deviation from international human rights standards, assumingly the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, which the Maldives ratified in 2006. However, upon ratification the Maldives did submit a reservation to the relevant Article 18, which begins by stating that ‘everyone shall have the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion’.  The hotly debated topic is further complicated by an apparent discrepancy between the Dhivehi version of the Constitution and the English translation. In the Dhivehi version, no person can be a citizen of the Maldives unless a Muslim – indicating that current citizens might be at risk of losing their citizenship, even those who live abroad.  In the Ministry of Information’s functional English translation, no person can become a citizen of the Maldives, meaning that applications for new citizenship from non-Muslims will be denied, while current citizens appear to be safe.  Whether this is a genuine case of ‘lost in translation’ or a deliberate attempt to water down the ramifications of the citizenship clause to interested outsiders remains to be seen.

Also remaining to be seen is how closely the Constitution will be observed by those in authority, and how much impact it will have on the lives of ordinary Maldivians.  While in Male’ awareness of and interest in the Constitution is relatively high, reports from the atolls tell a different story.  While there are pockets of political interest, independent information is slow to disseminate in the remoter parts of the country, where only the state TV and radio stations reach the island populations. The Constitution, while a vital step forward for the civil and political rights of the population, just sparsely outlines economic and social entitlements, obliging the government to take only ‘reasonable measures’ – a phrase surely open to interpretation - to ensure the economic and social rights of its citizens. Against a backdrop of rising living costs the Constitution leaves many unanswered questions for the country’s poorest people.  Economic and social concerns – lack of available healthcare and further education, overcrowding and low levels of affordable housing,  a weak transport system – are the bread-and-butter themes at the forefront of the election campaigning.