Did we lose or gain democracy through the transition of government?

We had many hopes when we voted to change the three decade old government of Maumoon Abdul Gayoom. Most people voted for a change - a new president reforming the government system for the benefit of people, especially genuine social reforms and estalishment of good governance.

We was not an easy thing given that many people were brainwashed. Everyone did whatever he or she could within his or her own means. The voting age has to be lowered to allow younger generation to have their say. The whole opposition has put aside the difference and united to bring the change we need. That's the sacrifice we made.

However, what we saw within the last three under former president Nasheed is questionable. He came to power with the democracy card but little did he do to advance the people's cause or for strengthening the democracy at its infancy.

During the last few months of Maumoon's presidency under the care of former Information Minister MP Nasheed the state media was gradually taking the shape of a genuine public broacaster and was waiting to receive a public broadcaster act. However, former president Nasheed hijacked the state media and turned them into a propaganda machines just like the times of Maumoon.

One essential element of democracy is empowering people and letting people have their say in their own matters. With this in mind, we saw for the first time local governance was introduced in Maldives through the new constitution. Ex president Nasheed first welcomed and encouraged this until we lose the local councils seats to the opposition members.

After the local election he came out with an undemocratic idea to control the local councils through his appointed members. Thus, he formed national offices to dictate instructions and control the budgets of these local councils. As a matter of fact, the local councils became dysfunctional and bodies without soul.

Injustice was a problem to be addressed but did Nasheed do anything genuine to reform the system? He appointed many ineffective AGs who could not advise or do anything through the legal framework to correct the existing problems. Although his party MDP has a majority in the parliament house, we did not see any genuine efforts to reform the justice system through amending and introducing new bills. The new penal code remained at committee stage for the last three years!

Anyone who thinks abducting Justice Abdulla, the chief justice of criminal court, was a genuine effort of Mr Nasheed to reform the judicial system must be a fool. What could removing one corrupt person do to reform a system riddled with corruption and misadministration. Forcing JSC, the parent body, to act diligently? Again, it raises the question what did his AG and his appointed member did being members of JSC.

Of course, Velezinee did try to do something but what support did he get from Nasheed's AG and MPs to pressure or reform JSC one need to ask. Although Velezinee had genuine interest to ensure  a well functioning judiciary, her critics yet argue the approach adopted by her to achieve the ends was unacceptable, unethical and controversial.

Most important aspect of a democracy is listening to people. Many protests were held by the opposition and his own coalition partners to make Mr Nasheed listen to people. Most times he gives a deaf ear and it takes enormous effort for anybody to make him hear the voices and demands of people. On the media he is known to have once said "let protesters protest. I do not have to make my decisions based on their demands."

Being ignorant of Maldivian's love for their faith, he underestimated it. He played it at his wills. He backtracked from his words that he would leave such talks for the scholars. He made many controversial comments on their belief and their prophet in public gatherings. Even known atheists in the internet world predicted his downfall after those comments were made on the public media.

There is no democracy when rule of law is not followed. We have seen Nasheed government struggling in the courts and many cases concluded against the state. Perhaps we could blame the corrupt judiciary system. However, we cannot blame everything on it such as defying the orders of Supreme Court which has a bench appointed by Mr Nasheed himself.

Be it coup or not, we see that some changes are good as now. We see a president trying to unite the nation by brining on board all the political parties. It was something Nasheed should have done when he was elected on a coalition ticket. This is what we need today to reform the many institutions that have not worked properly. Of all, parliament house need an overhaul.