shahuru.com

Where do we derive legitimacy for the constitution? We all seem to agree; from the people. Consequently, the people have the right to be informed of every idea and direction of thought related the process of constitutional change from the beginning to conclusion.

In contrast it gets advised often to the people to inform themselves on their own. The logic proposed here is that members of People’s Special Majlis and others elected and paid by people might not always work in the interest of the public. True to our experiences and fair enough to our common sense! A question, though, rises if the public were to allocate a large chunk their time to seek awareness of such matters, who will earn for the nation to pay for the elected and civil servants?

Then there are the unsure ones among us whether we should or should not inform people about the most important matters relating to the people and their nation. Information minister Nasheed says;

“……… it is imperative that the public is kept aware of how the country’s political landscape is going to be shaped. It is a must that they are given a snapshot of the Maldives that is about to happen. Question is, given the sensitivities involved, how best can we do that?” /www.mnasheed.com/

I guess Nasheed understands that he is talking about the sensitivities of people of the Maldives, about what will be included and excluded in the future constitution of the Maldives. Should he not use every method in every type of media to inform the Maldivian people at every stage of re-writing the constitution? Is it not for people to deal with sensitivities and come to terms with what will serve best their nation?

Regrettably though entrenched in the past habits of thinking like one deservedly own the temporarily entrusted authority and subordining oneself to middlemen instead of the source of power make the most informed and capable among us to lack even the least of integrity expected of them when performing for the people.