Ousting of Former Maldivian President Mohammed Nasheed, Can This Be Viewed as Failure of Democracy?

Ousting of former Maldivian President Mohammed Nasheed, can this be viewed as failure of democracy?

Shock reverberated across the world on hearing that the former Maldivian president, Mohammed Nasheed had been forced to step down in the face of a coup d'état staged by the opposition supported by members of the police force. Questions began to arise whether this was to be viewed as the failure of democracy for a country deemed as an instigator of the Arab Spring.

On 7th February 2012, news articles reported the fall of the first democratically elected president of Maldives, forced to resign by opposition supporters who were joined by members of the police force in the protest. Nasheed had swept away the 30-year old autocratic (The Guardian, 2012) regime of Maumoon Gayoom when he won the democratic elections in 2008. He had held great promises for democratic reforms but what he didn't bargain for was the powerful networks of regime loyalists that remained behind in the political system in the form of parliament members and judiciary officials attempting to strangle the nascent democracy. Sadly now, Maldives sees its spring being rolled back: a leader elected through the ballot box has just been deposed by street violence and intimidation (The Guardian, 2012).

The failure of democracy?

Political tensions have been rife in the country that has been struggling with issues of education, healthcare, rampant drug abuse and environmental issues.

Despite the democratic elections in 2008, the opposition which included businessmen and officials loyal to the former dictator had never accepted the outcome of this election feeling threatened by Nasheed's campaign against corruption. They would for this reason intermittently stage protests against Nasheed's government citing economic conditions created by reforms imposed by Nasheed.

In January 2012, matters came to head when a prominent judge, Justice Mohammed was jailed, accused as of being loyal to the opposition parties. However, political tensions in the country had been simmering even before that, since December of last year over the issue of banning of massage parlors and sale of alcohol and pork in resorts (CNN, 2012).

Without doubt, the events of the past few weeks in Maldives have brought into sharp focus Nasheed's struggle for democratic reforms during his three year regime, but the question being pondered on is whether Nasheed made the right choice by stepping down.

The deposed president's lifelong struggle has been for democracy (The Guardian, 2012), and the statement made by him (CNN, 2012) when stepping down gives us an insight into the lofty ideals he held of democracy. To further shed light on his action, a line from Rickards (2012, p.21) comes to mind:

"Leaders resolve dilemmas through action. Their actions are often seen in hindsight as escaping from a mind-set that is blocking off effective action. In so doing, the leader demonstrates creativity."

Thus, Nasheed's decision to step