With honesty, working with any governing system is possible: President

President Ibrahim Mohamed Solih, on Tuesday, stated that it is possible to advance through either presidential or parliamentary governing systems by embodying sincerity in fulfilling responsibilities to citizens.

The President gave the statement in a special interview with local media Mihaaru on March 27, despite having also noted that both systems were flawed.

Allegations that former President Mohamed Nasheed contesting for Mahchangolhi Central constituency on Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) electoral ticket in the imminent parliamentary elections is an attempt to convert the governing system to the parliamentary system, entered circulation from the time he publicised his intent to run for office.

Nasheed previously claimed in Public Service Media (PSM)’s televised candidate debates that he will respect any outcomes decided by citizens.

Responding to rumours about Nasheed, President Solih articulated that addressing work with honesty, in solidarity and within the bounds of the law should take priority over deciding on governing systems. He further stated that the root of the problem lay with those elected to serve the citizens and not in the system itself.

Moreover, the president called the current system incomplete, highlighting that difficulties in governing arise due to various executive powers granted to parliamentarians and that an alternative should be reached.

“If not, we would have to wait and continue to look to decisions made by the parliament upon its first sitting”, said President Solih.

When asked whether the easier alternative is to convert to parliamentary governing system, he responded that opportunities are already present to work in the current system. In accordance, he elaborated that it should not be as easy as it is for Maldives’ simple majority to pass no-confidence motions against Ministers. He added that a person trusted by the parliament should only be removed from position in relation to major cases.

The President concluded that while pros and cons exist in both governing systems, the answer as to which system is most suitable would be unique to each country.