When most people think of the Maldives, images of an obscenely beautiful resort come to mind: white sand beaches set against a cloudless blue sky, crystal waters, and palm leaves serenely swaying in the warm, coconut scented air. Scenically, the Maldives are an oceanic paradise; a group of brilliant gems dotting the Indian Ocean.

But the Maldives are not simply a playground for tourists. In reality, the Maldives is a country that has been ruled by an autocratic government for the past 25 years.

Various media sources report that the Maldivian government has been locking up opposition leaders under the charges of terrorism, treason and sedition. Recently, however, two political dissidents were freed. One of them is Jennifer Latheef, and the other is Mohamed Nasheed (Anni), a senior leader of the Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP):

A senior Maldives opposition leader on trial for treason and sedition has been released after over a year in custody, but the country's foreign minister said charges will remain for the moment [Link].

Mr Nasheed has been a vocal critic of President Maumoon Abdul Gayoom who has ruled the Indian Ocean archipelago for more than 25 years.

He was accused of using a speech in July 2005 to urge the forcible removal of President Gayoom [Link].

Nasheed was arrested on Aug. 12 last year during an MDP rally and appeared in court two months later accused of inciting the overthrow of the government, terrorism and sedition [Link].

He faced life in prison if found guilty, and is the second senior party figure to be freed in five weeks, cases that have outraged human rights groups [Link]. 

Shareef [the Maldivian government spokesman] said the terrorism charges against Nasheed were still pending but they could be dropped "if he sticks to his side of the bargain and drops his militant approach." [Link].

What exactly are Nasheed and the other members of the opposition asking for?

Nasheed...ended a self-imposed exile in Britain and travelled to the Indian Ocean archipelago last year to demand political reforms but was arrested on terrorism charges which he denied [Link].

Leaders of the Maldives opposition Thursday demanded fair and free elections in the Indian Ocean nation before the scheduled date of 2008. Addressing a press conference in the Indian capital, Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) leader Mohamed Latheef appealed to the international community to pressure President Maumoon Abdul Gayoom to speed up the promised process of political reforms leading to the elections.

Gayoom launched a roadmap for democratic reform in March 2006 under which he promised changes in the constitution and multiparty elections in 2008.

Latheef and the other opposition leaders accompanying him, however, claimed that repression of political dissidents continued after Gayoom's announcement and no real progress had been made.

Opponents accuse Gayoom, who came to power in the Maldives in 1978 and is Asia's longest serving political leader, of being an autocrat.

They also accuse him of human rights abuses, a charge he has denied.

Political dissidents in the Maldives are, however, routinely arrested and several have served long terms in jail [Link].

Is the Maldivian government moving towards reforms by freeing some dissidents? Some observers are optimistic, in light of the fact that the government also "acceded to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), and the Optional Protocol to the ICCPR, and the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR)" on September 19 [Link]. Amnesty International itself issued the following press release, which cautiously approves the steps that the government has recently taken:

Amnesty International welcomes the release of Mohamed Nasheed, Chairperson of the opposition party, Maldivian Democratic Party. He was arrested in August 2005 during a peaceful protest in the main public square in the capital, Malé, and was later charged with “sedition”.

Amnesty International considered his detention to be politically motivated and was concerned he would not receive a fair trial. Mohamed Nasheed attended several court hearings but the court did not come to a decision. Amnesty International is very concerned that despite release, Mohamed Nasheed’s “sedition” charges have not been withdrawn and is urging the government to ensure that these charges are not used in any way to detain him again on politically motivated grounds.

Amnesty International also congratulates the Government of Maldives for its move to accede to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, the Optional Protocol to International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, and the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights. The government announced that it had deposited instruments of accession to these covenants with the UN yesterday. The Maldives also pioneered the signing of the Optional Protocol to the Convention against Torture in Asia in 2005.

These are very positive developments, but reforming the political system and achieving maximum human rights protection requires continued determination, resources and political will. Amnesty International calls upon the Government of Maldives to incorporate the provisions of these international instruments in the national law of the Maldives and to strengthen the judicial system to enable it to safeguard their implementation in practice [Link]. 

Minivan, a Maldivian independent news source, is looking on the bright side as well:

Anni’s release certainly provides cause for the opposition to celebrate. The MDP staged numerous protests for Anni’s release. However, for the ruling regime, Anni’s release signals that the president’s iron grip on the country is weakening.

In autocratic countries, including Maldives over the last twenty-eight years, rulers abuse the judicial system to prosecute enemies and maintain control. This may be a more subtle form of influence than the brute strength of the state’s baton-wielding security forces, but maintains the same psychological effect. The state keeps people scared, and thereby unwilling to challenge the established order.

This scenario has played itself out in Maldives. Heavy-handed police tactics have worked in tandem with judicial threats to deliver the same message: attempt to implement regime change, and you will pay heavy consequences. Anni’s detention is a classic example of the state’s use of judicial power to punish a political opponent.

However,

Rather than reinforcing the state’s dominance, Anni’s case has merely illustrated to the public that the powers of the state are no longer absolute [Link].

Let's hope that this optimism is warranted. For the sake of the Maldivian people.