Explaining the Electoral System of the Maldives from 1900 to 2025-Dr. Raju Ahmed Dipu

The Maldives, a small island nation in the Indian Ocean, has experienced a unique evolution in its electoral system from the early 20th century to the present day. Understanding its voting methods and systems of representation requires an overview of its political and constitutional history, which transitioned from a sultanate with limited consultative processes to a modern republic with multi-party democratic elections.

Electoral System in the Early 20th Century (1900–1950)

Between 1900 and the mid-20th century, the Maldives was an absolute monarchy under the rule of a Sultan. There were no formal elections or representative institutions as understood in contemporary democratic terms. Governance was predominantly autocratic, and political participation by the general population was minimal or non-existent.

Some local consultative assemblies, such as the Majlis (Council), existed but were largely advisory and appointed by the Sultan. These councils did not operate with elected representation or formal voting systems, so no electoral system such as First-Past-The-Post (FPTP) or proportional representation was in use.

The 1950s to 1968: Introduction of Representative Institutions

In the 1950s, the Maldives began tentative steps toward political reform. The People’s Majlis (Parliament) was established in 1953, marking the first form of representative government. Early elections to the Majlis were conducted, but the system was still limited in scope:

Voting system: Candidates were elected through a majoritarian system, where individuals ran in constituencies, and the one with the most votes won.

Representation: The electoral system was simple majority/plurality-based (akin to First-Past-The-Post), with members representing specific geographic constituencies.

However, suffrage was restricted by property and literacy qualifications, limiting voter participation.

During this time, the Maldives was transitioning from a Sultanate to a republic in 1968, abolishing the monarchy and instituting a presidential system.

From 1968 to the 2000s: Single-Party Dominance and Controlled Elections

Following the establishment of the republic, the Maldives’ political landscape was dominated by the Maldives Democratic Party (MDP) and later by authoritarian regimes under various presidents.

The electoral system for the People’s Majlis continued to be based on single-member constituencies, with representatives elected by plurality vote (First-Past-The-Post).

Presidential elections were held, but for many years these were largely uncontested or heavily influenced by the ruling party.

There was no proportional representation or mixed electoral system in place.

Electoral System Post-2008: Multi-Party Democracy and Reform

The 2008 Constitution marked a watershed moment, introducing multi-party democracy and electoral reforms.

The People’s Majlis is composed of members elected from single-member constituencies using a First-Past-The-Post (FPTP) system.

The president is elected by direct popular vote in a two-round system: if no candidate achieves a majority in the first round, a runoff is held between the top two candidates.

This system ensures a majoritarian outcome for the presidency and clear constituency representation in the Majlis.

Despite these reforms, there is no use of proportional representation or mixed systems at the national level.

Summary of Maldives Electoral Systems (1900–2025)

From an absolute monarchy with no elections in the early 20th century, the Maldives has gradually evolved into a multi-party democratic system with regular, competitive elections. Its electoral system has consistently favoured majoritarian, single-member constituency representation, primarily using the First-Past-The-Post voting method for legislative elections. The presidency is elected via a two-round majority vote system to ensure clear legitimacy.

Despite these democratic advancements, the Maldives’ electoral system remains majoritarian rather than proportional, which has implications for political pluralism and representation of smaller parties. Nevertheless, the reforms since 2008 have strengthened democratic practices in this island nation.

When Did Maldives Transition to a Multi-Party or Democratic Electoral System?

The Maldives, known for its stunning atolls and vibrant culture, has also undergone significant political transformation over the past few decades. Central to this transformation is its transition from an authoritarian single-party system to a multi-party democracy—a journey marked by reforms, protests, and historic elections.

Early Political Landscape: Authoritarian Rule

For much of the 20th century, the Maldives was governed under an autocratic framework. The country was ruled by a sultanate until 1968 when it became a republic, but power remained highly centralised. From 1978 onwards, Maumoon Abdul Gayoom held the presidency for an extraordinary 30 years. His administration operated under a system where political opposition was limited, and the country functioned effectively as a one-party state, despite occasional nominal references to other parties.

The Beginning of Democratic Reform: Early 2000s

The seeds for democratic transition were sown in the early 2000s. Domestic and international pressure for political reform increased, particularly concerning human rights and governance transparency.

2003: Pro-democracy demonstrations and calls for reform gained momentum. Activists and opposition figures began to demand a more open political system.

2004: The government announced plans for constitutional reform, aiming to introduce a multi-party democracy.

The 2008 Constitution: The Dawn of Multi-Party Democracy

The Maldives’ official transition to a multi-party democratic system occurred with the ratification of a new constitution in August 2008. This document introduced key reforms:

Legal recognition of multiple political parties.

Separation of powers between the executive, legislature, and judiciary.

Guarantees for fundamental freedoms, including freedom of speech and assembly.

Introduction of an independent electoral commission.

This constitution marked the end of Maumoon Abdul Gayoom’s three-decade rule and established the framework for genuinely competitive elections.

First Multi-Party Presidential Election: 2008

The first truly competitive multi-party presidential election took place in October 2008. It was historic for several reasons:

Candidates: Maumoon Abdul Gayoom (incumbent) versus Mohamed Nasheed (opposition leader).

Outcome: Mohamed Nasheed won, marking the first peaceful democratic transfer of power in the Maldives’ history.

Significance: The election was internationally praised for being free and fair, signalling the Maldives’ firm commitment to democratic governance.

Challenges and Developments Since Transition

Since 2008, the Maldives has experienced both democratic progress and setbacks:

Political instability and tensions between ruling parties and the opposition.

Concerns over judicial independence and media freedom.

Subsequent elections continuing the multi-party process, albeit with occasional disputes.

Despite challenges, the multi-party system remains the foundation of Maldivian politics.

Summary Timeline

The Maldives’ transition to a multi-party democratic system is a relatively recent yet profound chapter in its political history. While challenges remain, the country’s constitutional reforms and electoral milestones since 2008 have laid the groundwork for a more open and participatory political environment. Observers continue to watch closely as the Maldives navigates its democratic journey amid domestic and regional complexities.

Maldives National Election Results and Political Outcomes (1900–2025)

The Maldives, a small island nation in the Indian Ocean, has experienced a unique political evolution throughout the 20th and early 21st centuries. Unlike many countries, the Maldives did not hold competitive multi-party elections until relatively recently, given its long history as an absolute monarchy and later a sultanate.

Early 20th Century to Mid-20th Century:

Between 1900 and the mid-1900s, the Maldives was ruled as a sultanate with no formal parliamentary elections. Political power was concentrated in the hands of the sultan and royal family, and no national legislative elections occurred.

Transition to a Republic and Introduction of Elections:

The Maldives declared itself a republic in 1968 after a national referendum, abolishing the sultanate. The first modern elections began soon after, but political competition remained limited as the country was dominated by strong executive powers.

Emergence of Multiparty Politics (2000s onwards):

It was only in the early 2000s that the Maldives started holding multi-party elections. The introduction of a new constitution in 2008 marked a significant milestone, establishing a democratic framework with a president elected by popular vote and a multi-party system.

Since then, several parties have contested national elections, notably:

Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP)

Dhivehi Rayyithunge Party (DRP)

Jumhooree Party (JP)

Election turnout has generally been robust, often exceeding 70%, reflecting the population’s keen interest in democratic participation.

Maldives General Election, 1977

The 1977 election in the Maldives was held under the sultanate's system transitioning towards republicanism. It was a non-partisan election characterised by indirect selection rather than popular vote. No formal political parties contested as political parties were yet to be legally recognised.

Seats contested: 54

Seats won: All by government-endorsed candidates

Voter turnout: Data not officially recorded due to the nature of the electoral system, but participation was limited to select elites and local councils.

The election underscored the Maldives’ continued move toward centralised governance but fell short of introducing genuine electoral competition.

The Maldives’ electoral journey from 1900 to 2025 reflects a gradual but momentous shift from monarchical rule to a vibrant democratic system. The advent of multi-party democracy in the 21st century has transformed political engagement, with increasingly competitive elections shaping the nation's governance.

Major Political Parties, Leaders, and Election Outcomes in the Maldives (1900–2025)

The Maldives’ political landscape over the past century has evolved from a traditional sultanate system to a nascent multi-party democracy, marked by significant transformations in governance and electoral competition. While formal political parties emerged relatively late compared to many other nations, the Maldives’ electoral history since the early 20th century is rich with pivotal figures and political shifts.

Early 20th Century to 1968: Sultanate and Limited Electoral Activity

From 1900 until the late 1960s, the Maldives was a sultanate with limited formal electoral processes. Governance was dominated by the Sultan and his appointed ministers, with no organised political parties or democratic elections as understood today. Political power was largely hereditary or controlled by elites.

1968: The Birth of the Republic and Introduction of Referendum

In 1968, a landmark referendum abolished the Sultanate and established the Maldives as a republic. The referendum was pivotal, with Ibrahim Nasir playing a central role as the country’s first president. Though still authoritarian, this shift laid the groundwork for future electoral contests.

1978–2008: One-Party Dominance and Emerging Political Opposition

During this period, political parties were officially banned, and presidential power was consolidated under Maumoon Abdul Gayoom, who served as president from 1978 to 2008. Though elections were held, they were largely uncontested or featured only nominal opposition due to the political restrictions.

Maumoon Abdul Gayoom (Dhivehi Rayyithunge Party – later founded in 2005) was the dominant figure, winning multiple presidential elections often amid criticism for lack of transparency and political repression.

2008: Transition to Multi-Party Democracy

The Maldives’ first multi-party presidential election took place in 2008, marking a historic transition. Key parties and leaders included:

Dhivehi Rayyithunge Party (DRP), led by incumbent Maumoon Abdul Gayoom.

Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP), led by Mohamed Nasheed, a prominent pro-democracy activist.

Outcome: Mohamed Nasheed won the presidency, becoming the country’s first democratically elected leader, signalling hope for democratic reforms and greater political freedoms.

2013–2020: Political Turbulence and Power Struggles

The period following Nasheed’s presidency was marked by political instability:

Abdulla Yameen of the Progressive Party of Maldives (PPM), half-brother of Maumoon Gayoom, won the 2013 presidential election amid allegations of vote-rigging and authoritarian practices.

The opposition, mainly the MDP, accused the government of suppressing dissent and restricting media freedoms.

2018: Democratic Resurgence

The 2018 presidential election was a significant democratic milestone. Key leaders:

Ibrahim Mohamed Solih (MDP), who campaigned on restoring democracy and rule of law.

Incumbent Abdulla Yameen (PPM), seeking re-election.

Outcome: Ibrahim Mohamed Solih won decisively, signalling a shift back towards democratic governance and increased international engagement.

2019–2025: Consolidation and Challenges

Since 2019, the Maldives has been consolidating its democratic institutions amid ongoing challenges such as political polarisation and governance issues.

The Maldivian Democratic Party remains the dominant political force under President Solih.

Opposition parties continue to contest elections, including parliamentary polls, although political rivalries remain intense.

The Maldives’ electoral history reflects a remarkable transformation from monarchical rule to a vibrant, though still evolving, multi-party democracy. Key leaders like Maumoon Abdul Gayoom, Mohamed Nasheed, and Ibrahim Mohamed Solih have shaped the political landscape. Elections since 2008 have become competitive and relatively transparent, though challenges remain in ensuring political stability and democratic consolidation through to 2025.

Electoral Violence and Irregularities in the Maldives (1900–2025): An Overview

The Maldives, a small island nation in the Indian Ocean, has experienced a relatively peaceful electoral history compared to many countries in the region. However, its journey to a fully functioning democracy has not been without challenges. This article examines reported electoral irregularities, violence, and disruptions in Maldivian elections from 1900 to 2025.

Electoral Violence and Irregularities: Historical Context

Given the Maldives’ unique political and cultural context, overt electoral violence has been relatively rare. The nation only began holding multiparty presidential elections in 2008, following decades of autocratic rule under President Maumoon Abdul Gayoom. Prior to this, elections were largely uncontested, with limited political competition.

Reported Electoral Irregularities and Violence

2008 Presidential Election
The Maldives’ first multiparty presidential election marked a significant step toward democracy. While the election was largely peaceful, some international observers noted concerns over voter intimidation and the use of state resources favouring incumbent Maumoon Abdul Gayoom. Nevertheless, the election was considered competitive and credible overall, resulting in the victory of Mohamed Nasheed after a runoff.

2013 Presidential Election and Political Unrest
The 2013 presidential election was marred by controversy and tension. Initially postponed several times due to political disputes, it finally took place in two rounds in September and November. After Mohamed Nasheed resigned under disputed circumstances in 2012, political polarization intensified. The second round was boycotted by opposition candidates, raising questions about legitimacy. Some reports highlighted incidents of intimidation and restrictions on opposition campaigning.

2018 Presidential Election
The 2018 election was notable for a peaceful transfer of power, with Ibrahim Mohamed Solih defeating the incumbent Abdulla Yameen. While largely free of violence, observers raised concerns over media bias and political pressure on opposition parties. Some isolated incidents of intimidation were reported but did not escalate into widespread violence.

Election Annulments, Delays, and Boycotts

2013 Parliamentary Election: The election was postponed twice amid political disputes before finally taking place in March 2014.

2013 Presidential Election: The election was delayed multiple times. The Supreme Court annulled the results of the September 2013 election following legal challenges, leading to a re-run in November 2013.

Opposition Boycotts: Several opposition parties have boycotted parliamentary sessions or elections to protest alleged electoral unfairness, particularly in the early 2010s.

Summary of Key Electoral Disruptions

While the Maldives has avoided large-scale electoral violence seen in other countries, its electoral processes have faced irregularities, delays, and political tensions, especially since the advent of multiparty democracy in 2008. Issues such as election postponements, legal challenges, and isolated intimidation reflect the growing pains of a young democracy still consolidating its institutions.

Maintaining political stability and ensuring transparent, credible elections remain critical challenges for the Maldives as it continues its democratic journey into the 21st century.

Democracy Index & Reform in the Maldives (1900–2025): Electoral Democracy, Reforms, and Challenges

The Maldives, a small island nation in the Indian Ocean, has experienced a unique trajectory in its democratic development, especially in terms of electoral democracy. From a traditional sultanate to a nascent multi-party democracy, its political evolution has been marked by significant reforms interspersed with periods of backsliding. This article reviews the Maldives’ ranking and progress in electoral democracy from 1900 through 2025, highlighting key reforms and challenges.

Early 20th Century: Traditional Rule and Limited Political Participation

Throughout most of the 1900s, the Maldives was governed as an absolute monarchy under the Sultanate system. Political power was highly centralised, and electoral democracy as understood today was virtually non-existent. There were no formal elections for national leadership, and public political participation was minimal.

Mid-20th Century: Steps Toward Modern Governance

1932 Constitution: The first written constitution was introduced, establishing a constitutional monarchy with a legislative body (the People’s Majlis). However, this body was largely advisory, and electoral mechanisms remained limited.

1953 First Republic: A brief experiment with a republic occurred, including presidential elections, but it was short-lived, and the Sultanate was reinstated soon after.

Late 20th Century: Authoritarian Consolidation

From the 1960s through the 2000s, Maldives was ruled by President Ibrahim Nasir (1968–1978) followed by President Maumoon Abdul Gayoom (1978–2008). Despite holding regular elections, these were characterised by:

Limited Political Competition: Elections were effectively controlled by the ruling elite, with opposition banned or heavily restricted.

Single-Party Dominance: The Maldives lacked genuine multi-party electoral democracy, with opposition voices marginalised.

International Criticism: Observers frequently criticised the Maldives for lack of free and fair elections, media restrictions, and human rights concerns.

2008: Landmark Democratic Reforms and Multi-Party Elections

The year 2008 marked a significant turning point:

New Constitution: Introduced in 2008, it established a multi-party democracy with a stronger separation of powers and enhanced civil liberties.

First Multi-Party Presidential Election: Mohamed Nasheed defeated the long-serving incumbent President Gayoom in a free and fair election, widely hailed as a democratic breakthrough.

Improved Democracy Index Ranking: This election and constitutional reform boosted the Maldives’ standing in electoral democracy metrics, reflecting genuine voter choice and political competition.

2010s: Democratic Progress and Political Instability

Continued Multi-Party Elections: Presidential and parliamentary elections were held regularly, with the Maldives embracing democratic norms.

Challenges of Political Turbulence: Several elections saw contested results, allegations of corruption, and judicial interference.

Backsliding Concerns: From around 2015, international indices noted signs of democratic erosion linked to:

Arrests of opposition figures.

Executive interference in the judiciary.

Media clampdowns and restrictions on dissent.

2020s: Fragile Democracy Amid Renewed Hope

2023 Presidential Election: Marked by a peaceful transfer of power, with opposition leader Ibrahim Mohamed Solih winning re-election amid international praise for electoral transparency.

Democracy Index Status: According to global assessments, the Maldives fluctuated between “hybrid regime” and “flawed democracy” categories during this decade.

Ongoing Reforms: Efforts continue to strengthen institutions, improve electoral processes, and protect civil liberties, but political polarisation remains a challenge.

Summary of Maldives’ Electoral Democracy (1900–2025)

The Maldives’ journey in electoral democracy has been uneven, marked by a long period of autocratic rule, followed by promising reforms in 2008 and thereafter. While the nation has made commendable strides towards democratic elections and political pluralism, persistent challenges such as institutional weaknesses, political polarisation, and occasional backsliding continue to hamper full democratic consolidation.

As of 2025, the Maldives remains a fragile democracy with substantial potential for democratic deepening—provided political actors commit to strengthening the rule of law, protecting electoral integrity, and promoting inclusive governance.

Major Electoral Reforms in the Maldives from 1900 to 2025

The Maldives, a small island nation in the Indian Ocean, has undergone significant political and electoral changes throughout the 20th and early 21st centuries. From a traditional monarchy with limited political participation to a modern republic with competitive multi-party elections, the Maldives’ electoral reforms reflect its journey towards democracy.

Early 20th Century: Traditional Governance and Limited Political Participation

In the early 1900s, the Maldives was an absolute monarchy ruled by the Sultan. Political power was highly centralised, and there were no formal elections or democratic institutions in place. Governance was largely influenced by the Sultan and his appointed officials, with little to no popular participation in political decision-making.

1953: The First Attempt at Republican Governance

Introduction of the First Constitution (1953): The Maldives adopted its first written constitution, which abolished the monarchy and declared the country a republic.

First Presidential Election: Mohamed Amin Didi was elected as the first President by the parliament, not through direct popular vote.

Reversion to Monarchy: The republic was short-lived; a popular uprising led to the restoration of the Sultanate within the same year.

This brief republican experiment introduced the idea of formalised governance and representation but did not establish democratic elections as understood today.

1968: Permanent Shift to a Republic and Introduction of Indirect Elections

Second Republic Established (1968): The Maldives abolished the Sultanate for good and became a republic.

Indirect Presidential Elections: The President was elected by the People’s Majlis (parliament), not by direct popular vote.

Limited Political Pluralism: Political parties were banned; candidates stood as independents.

Though a republican system was established, elections remained tightly controlled, with limited democratic freedoms.

2005–2008: Introduction of Multi-Party Democracy and Direct Elections

Political Liberalisation (2005): Under international and domestic pressure, the government allowed the registration of political parties, ending the one-party system.

New Constitution (2008): A landmark reform introduced a democratic constitution with guarantees for fundamental rights, separation of powers, and a multi-party system.

First Multi-Party Presidential Election (2008): The Maldives held its first direct, multi-party presidential election, marking a watershed in its democratic evolution.

Introduction of Universal Suffrage: All citizens aged 18 and above gained the right to vote in free and fair elections.

Post-2008: Consolidation and Challenges of Democracy

Regular Elections: Presidential and parliamentary elections were held regularly, with multiple political parties contesting.

Electoral Commission: An independent Election Commission was established to oversee electoral processes and ensure transparency.

Reforms for Electoral Integrity: Measures such as biometric voter registration and improved electoral dispute resolution mechanisms were introduced.

Political Instability: The democratic process faced challenges including allegations of vote-rigging, political arrests, and brief periods of emergency rule.

Recent Developments (2018–2025)

Peaceful Transfer of Power (2018): Opposition candidate Ibrahim Mohamed Solih won the presidential election, marking the first peaceful transfer of power between parties through a democratic vote.

Strengthening Electoral Laws: Amendments to electoral laws have aimed at increasing transparency, combating corruption, and protecting voter rights.

Digital Innovations: Steps towards modernising voter registration and election monitoring through technology have been undertaken.

Ongoing Challenges: Political polarization and concerns over media freedom remain issues impacting electoral fairness.

From an absolute monarchy with no formal elections to a vibrant, if sometimes turbulent, democracy, the Maldives’ electoral reforms from 1900 to 2025 highlight a significant transformation:

Early 20th century: No elections, autocratic rule.

Mid-20th century: Brief republican experiment and later indirect presidential elections under a one-party system.

2008 onwards: Establishment of multi-party democracy, direct presidential elections, and universal suffrage.

Comparing the Electoral Systems of the Maldives from 1900 to 2025: Which Was More Democratic?

The Maldives has experienced a remarkable political transformation from a traditional sultanate to a modern democratic republic over the course of the 20th and early 21st centuries. Comparing its electoral systems across this period reveals a clear trajectory towards greater democracy.

Electoral System in the Early 20th Century (1900–1950s): Monarchy and Limited Political Participation

For much of the early 1900s, the Maldives was governed as an absolute monarchy under the Sultan, with political power concentrated in his hands. During this era:

No electoral system existed for national leadership or legislative representation.

Governance was hereditary and autocratic, with decisions made by the Sultan and his appointed officials.

The population had no formal voting rights or mechanisms for political participation.

The sole notable disruption was the brief establishment of the First Republic in 1953, where the President was elected by parliament rather than by popular vote. However, this republic lasted only months before the Sultanate was restored.

Post-1968: The Second Republic and Indirect Elections

In 1968, the Maldives abolished the monarchy permanently and declared itself a republic. Under this system:

The President was elected indirectly by the People’s Majlis (parliament), not by direct popular vote.

Political parties remained banned, meaning elections featured independent candidates often aligned with ruling elites.

The political environment was highly controlled, limiting genuine competition or democratic choice.

This system offered some formal institutional structure but fell short of democratic standards due to the lack of popular suffrage and political pluralism.

Democratic Transition (2005–Present): Multi-Party Elections and Universal Suffrage

The most significant reforms occurred from 2005 onwards:

The government permitted the formation of political parties, ending decades of a one-party system.

The 2008 Constitution established a comprehensive democratic framework, including:

Direct presidential elections by universal adult suffrage (18+ years).

Competitive multi-party elections for the presidency and legislature.

An independent Election Commission to oversee elections.

Since 2008, the Maldives has held multiple presidential and parliamentary elections featuring genuine competition and peaceful transfers of power, including the landmark 2018 election where opposition candidate Ibrahim Mohamed Solih won.

Which System Was More Democratic?

The Maldives today, with its multi-party elections and universal voting rights, is far more democratic than it was under the traditional monarchy or the controlled republics of the past. While challenges remain—such as political polarisation and occasional concerns about electoral fairness—the shift towards popular participation and political competition marks a substantial democratic advancement.

In sum, the Maldives’ electoral system has evolved from non-existent or autocratic governance in the early 20th century to a modern democratic system featuring universal suffrage and competitive elections by 2025. The latter period is decidedly more democratic, reflecting broader global trends towards inclusive governance.

Which Countries Held Their First Democratic Election in the 20th Century—and Under What Systems?

The 20th century witnessed a profound transformation in global politics, marked by the spread of democratic governance beyond its traditional Western heartlands. Many countries held their first democratic elections during this era, often shaped by unique historical contexts, colonial legacies, and constitutional choices. This article surveys notable countries that conducted their inaugural democratic elections in the 20th century, highlighting the electoral systems they adopted.

Defining Democratic Elections in the 20th Century

For this analysis, “democratic elections” refer to processes characterised by:

Universal or broadly inclusive suffrage.

Genuine competition among multiple parties or candidates.

Free and fair voting procedures, with legal safeguards for political rights.

Notable Countries and Their First Democratic Elections

South Africa (1910)

Election: The 1910 South African general election following the Union of South Africa’s formation.

System: First-Past-The-Post (FPTP) in single-member constituencies.

Context: Limited franchise primarily to white male citizens; non-white populations largely excluded until decades later.

 India (1951–1952)

Election: The first general election after independence in 1947, held from 1951 to 1952.

System: First-Past-The-Post (FPTP).

Significance: Largest democratic exercise at the time, establishing parliamentary democracy and universal adult suffrage despite enormous social diversity.

Ireland (1922)

Election: The 1922 general election following the establishment of the Irish Free State.

System: Proportional Representation by Single Transferable Vote (PR-STV).

Remark: PR-STV was adopted to ensure fair representation of diverse political and religious communities.

Nigeria (1959)

Election: The 1959 federal election prior to independence in 1960.

System: First-Past-The-Post (FPTP).

Note: Marked a critical step in decolonisation and democratic governance establishment.

Chile (1920)

Election: The 1920 presidential election marked the country’s first truly competitive and democratically significant election.

System: Direct popular vote with a two-round system.

Context: Democratic consolidation followed decades of oligarchic control.

Germany (1919)

Election: The 1919 Weimar National Assembly election, the first democratic election in Germany.

System: Proportional Representation (PR) system.

Outcome: Established the Weimar Republic and introduced universal suffrage, including women.

Japan (1925)

Election: The 1928 general election was the first under universal male suffrage, with women gaining the vote only after WWII.

System: Multi-member constituencies with Plurality-at-Large Voting.

Significance: Marked a move toward broader electoral participation.

Australia (1901)

Election: The 1901 federal election following federation.

System: Preferential voting (instant-runoff) in the House of Representatives.

Note: Australia was a pioneer in adopting preferential voting to ensure majority support.

New Zealand (1893/1900)

Election: While women gained suffrage in 1893, the early 20th century saw the establishment of regular parliamentary elections under FPTP.

System: First-Past-The-Post.

Legacy: Among the earliest democracies to extend suffrage to women.

Philippines (1935)

Election: The 1935 presidential election under the Commonwealth government.

System: Direct popular vote for president and legislature.

Context: Part of a transitional process from US colonial rule to independence.

Common Electoral Systems Adopted

First-Past-The-Post (FPTP): Most common system, favouring single-member constituencies and majoritarian outcomes.

Proportional Representation (PR): Adopted in countries with diverse populations to ensure minority representation (e.g., Ireland, Germany).

Preferential Voting: Used in Australia to ensure elected candidates secure majority support.

Factors Influencing Electoral System Choice

Colonial Heritage: British colonies often inherited FPTP, while European countries experimented with PR.

Ethnic and Political Diversity: Countries with diverse populations sometimes chose PR to avoid domination by a single group.

Political Culture: Preference for stable majority governments led some countries to favour majoritarian systems.

The 20th century’s democratic wave saw many countries hold their first democratic elections under varied systems shaped by history, society, and political goals. Understanding these inaugural elections and their frameworks provides crucial insight into each nation’s political evolution and the challenges faced in democratic consolidation.

Timeline of Major Elections and Key Political Events in the Maldives (1900–2025)

The Maldives’ electoral history reflects its transformation from a sultanate with limited political participation to a young democracy facing modern challenges. While formal elections only became prominent in the 21st century, several political milestones mark the nation’s democratic development. Below is a timeline highlighting major elections and turning points from 1900 to 2025.

Early 20th Century to Mid-1900s: Traditional Governance

1900–1950s: The Maldives was governed as a sultanate with no formal electoral processes for public office. Power was concentrated in the hands of the Sultan and royal administration.

1953: First Attempt at Republic and Early Political Reform

January 1953: The Maldives briefly declared a republic, abolishing the sultanate under President Mohamed Amin Didi. However, this republic was short-lived, and the sultanate was restored later the same year after a popular uprising.

Significance: This marked the earliest political experiment towards republicanism, although it did not involve nationwide elections.

1968: Referendum Abolishing the Sultanate

March 1968: A national referendum was held to decide whether to abolish the sultanate and establish a republic.

Result: The majority voted to abolish the sultanate, paving the way for the establishment of the second Maldivian republic.

1978–2008: Autocratic Rule and Limited Political Participation

1978: Maumoon Abdul Gayoom became president through a referendum, marking the beginning of a 30-year period of quasi-authoritarian rule.

Elections during this period: Presidential “elections” were conducted by referendum rather than competitive multi-candidate votes, with Maumoon Abdul Gayoom as the sole candidate. Parliamentary elections occurred but under strict government control and limited political freedoms.

2008: First Multiparty Presidential Election

October 2008: The Maldives held its first-ever competitive multiparty presidential election. Mohamed Nasheed of the Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) defeated incumbent Maumoon Abdul Gayoom.

Significance: Marked a landmark democratic breakthrough, introducing genuine electoral competition and a peaceful transfer of power.

2013: Contested Elections and Political Crisis

February 2012: Mohamed Nasheed resigned amid political turmoil and alleged coercion, with Mohammed Waheed Hassan assuming the presidency.

September 2013: Presidential election held; incumbent Abdulla Yameen declared winner amid opposition disputes.

November 2013: After a Supreme Court ruling annulling the September results, a re-run election took place, confirming Abdulla Yameen’s presidency.

Significance: This period was marked by political instability, legal challenges, and questions over election legitimacy.

2014: Parliamentary Elections

March 2014: Parliamentary elections conducted, with the ruling party consolidating power despite concerns over fairness.

2018: Peaceful Democratic Transition

September 2018: Presidential election saw Ibrahim Mohamed Solih of the opposition coalition defeat incumbent Abdulla Yameen, signalling a return to democratic openness.

2019–2025: Consolidation and Challenges

2019: Parliamentary elections took place with a focus on rebuilding democratic institutions.

2023–2025: Ongoing efforts to strengthen electoral processes, address political fragmentation, and enhance voter engagement.

Summary Table of Major Elections and Events

From traditional monarchy to modern democracy, the Maldives’ electoral history has been a journey of transformation punctuated by moments of political upheaval and reform. The country’s most significant democratic progress began only in the 21st century, with the 2008 election serving as a watershed. Challenges remain, but the Maldives continues to navigate its path toward stable democratic governance.

Major Electoral Events Reshaping Democracy in the Maldives (1900–2025)

The Maldives’ political and democratic journey over the past century has been marked by pivotal events that fundamentally reshaped its electoral landscape. From a centuries-old Sultanate to a fledgling multi-party democracy, these key moments reflect broader global trends of decolonisation, democratic reform, and political contestation.

Abolition of the Sultanate and Establishment of the Republic (1968)

Event: In a landmark referendum, the Maldives abolished its centuries-old Sultanate and declared itself a republic.

Impact: This marked the beginning of modern political governance in the Maldives, transitioning from hereditary monarchy to an elected presidential system. It echoed the global wave of decolonisation and republicanism sweeping Asia and Africa during the mid-20th century.

Consolidation of One-Party Rule under President Maumoon Abdul Gayoom (1978–2008)

Event: Maumoon Abdul Gayoom’s extended presidency, initially under a de facto one-party system.

Impact: While elections were held, they lacked genuine competition, reflecting authoritarian rollbacks common in several postcolonial states. This period saw limited political freedoms but provided political stability.

Introduction of Multi-Party Democracy (2005–2008)

Event: Constitutional reforms in 2005 paved the way for multi-party democracy, culminating in the 2008 presidential election.

Impact: This was a watershed moment that aligned the Maldives with global democratic norms. The 2008 election brought opposition leader Mohamed Nasheed to power, the country’s first democratically elected president, symbolising a clear break from authoritarian pasts.

Political Crisis and Resignation of Mohamed Nasheed (2012)

Event: Amid protests and political turmoil, President Nasheed resigned, citing a coup.

Impact: This episode exposed fragilities in the democratic system, with judiciary and security forces playing contested roles. It reflected broader global challenges where young democracies struggle to consolidate amidst institutional weaknesses.

Contested Elections and Authoritarian Backsliding (2013–2018)

Event: The 2013 presidential election brought Abdulla Yameen to power amid allegations of vote-rigging and suppression of opposition.

Impact: This period saw democratic backsliding, echoing global trends where electoral manipulation and authoritarianism resurged in certain democracies.

Democratic Reversal and the 2018 Election Victory of Ibrahim Mohamed Solih

Event: The peaceful and credible 2018 presidential election returned the opposition Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) to power.

Impact: This election was hailed internationally as a democratic breakthrough, reinforcing the Maldives’ commitment to democratic reforms and strengthening rule of law.

COVID-19 Pandemic and Electoral Challenges (2020–2021)

Event: The global COVID-19 crisis forced delays and adjustments in election scheduling and campaigning worldwide.

Impact: The Maldives faced challenges balancing public health with democratic processes, reflecting a global electoral dilemma.

The Maldives’ electoral history from 1900 to 2025 is a microcosm of global democratic transformations—shaped by revolutionary changes, authoritarian setbacks, and reformist breakthroughs. Each major event has contributed to the ongoing, often turbulent, evolution of democracy in this island nation, situating it firmly within broader international democratic trends.

CSV-Style Table: General Elections in Maldives (1900–2025)

From Sultanate to Suffrage: The Democratic Journey of the Maldives

Nestled in the Indian Ocean, the Maldives offers more than just turquoise waters and coral reefs — its political journey, spanning over a century, mirrors an island nation's evolving identity, resilience, and reform.

In the early 20th century, the Maldives operated under a hereditary Sultanate, with power centred around a conservative elite. The first written constitution in 1932 introduced a Majlis (assembly), but political power remained tightly held. A fleeting attempt at republicanism under Mohamed Amin Didi in 1953 ended with a swift return to monarchy.

Post-independence in 1965, the Maldives transitioned into a republic after a 1968 referendum, abolishing the Sultanate for good. Ibrahim Nasir, and later Maumoon Abdul Gayoom, ruled through a non-party or one-party presidential system, with electoral referenda often resembling plebiscites rather than genuine contests. Despite high turnout, elections during this era were characterised by limited political freedoms, controlled media, and restricted opposition.

The 1980s and 1990s brought growing domestic calls for reform, especially among youth and civil society, amplified by the global push for democratisation. Following pro-democracy protests and international scrutiny, the early 2000s marked a turning point.

In 2008, the Maldives held its first multi-party election. The Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP), led by Mohamed Nasheed, unseated Gayoom’s three-decade rule in a watershed moment. His presidency focused on democratic reform and climate advocacy, though he later resigned amid controversy.

The 2013 election saw a return of conservative elements under Abdulla Yameen, representing the Progressive Party of Maldives (PPM). His term was marked by authoritarian drift, judicial manipulation, and foreign policy pivoting toward China.

By 2018, discontent fuelled a return to MDP power under Ibrahim Mohamed Solih, pledging anti-corruption and renewed institutional trust. However, internal divisions and geopolitical balancing between India and China became flashpoints in the 2023 election, bringing Mohamed Muizzu (PNC) to power with promises of nationalist development and sovereignty.

Looking to 2025, Maldivian politics will likely pivot around climate vulnerability, tourism dependence, debt diplomacy, and the growing youth electorate. With sea levels rising and global interests converging on the island nation, the Maldives’ democracy—though young—is becoming increasingly consequential on the regional stage.

Global Electoral Trends by Decade: Maldives 1900 to 2025

The Maldives’ political landscape, from the dawn of the 20th century through to 2025, offers a fascinating microcosm of global electoral trends—marked by gradual democratization, sporadic authoritarian retrenchment, and evolving electoral innovations.

1900s to 1940s: Authoritarian Rule and Limited Political Participation

Throughout the early 20th century, the Maldives remained under the absolute rule of its sultanate. Political power was concentrated in hereditary monarchy, with no formal elections or popular representation. This era reflected a global trend in many smaller states and monarchies, where electoral processes were largely absent or symbolic.

1950s to 1960s: Transition and Early Reform

The mid-century witnessed initial stirrings toward political reform. In line with decolonisation waves globally, the Maldives began moving from sultanate to republic. Although elections were not yet competitive or multi-party, this period showed an incremental opening of political structures, mirroring regional shifts in South Asia and the Indian Ocean.

1970s to 1980s: Consolidation of Authoritarianism

During these decades, the Maldives maintained a strong centralised executive authority. Elections were controlled and lacked genuine opposition participation. This echoed the broader pattern of authoritarian rollbacks worldwide during the Cold War, where many countries limited political pluralism under the guise of stability and development.

1990s: Slow Move Towards Democratization

Global democratic optimism in the post-Cold War era influenced the Maldives, leading to discussions on political liberalisation. While multi-party politics remained restricted, there was a cautious increase in political debate and demands for reform, reflecting a nascent democratization trend common to many small island and developing nations.

2000s: Democratic Breakthrough and Electoral Innovations

The 2000s marked a turning point for the Maldives. With the adoption of a new constitution in 2008, the country embraced multi-party democracy, direct presidential elections, and electoral reforms ensuring transparency and voter rights. These innovations aligned with global movements promoting electoral integrity and citizen participation.

2010s to 2025: Democratic Challenges and Resilience

Despite democratic advances, the Maldives faced setbacks including political instability and allegations of electoral manipulation—manifestations of authoritarian rollbacks seen worldwide amid rising populism. Nonetheless, sustained civil society engagement and international attention have bolstered democratic resilience, continuing the global trend of contested but persistent democratization.

The Maldives’ electoral history from 1900 to 2025 mirrors global patterns: initial authoritarian dominance, gradual democratization punctuated by rollbacks, and ongoing electoral innovations. Its journey highlights the complex interplay between local context and wider international democratic trends.

Write like a political analyst explaining why the 2006 election in Maldives was controversial.

Example Output:

The 2006 presidential election in the Maldives stands as a pivotal moment in the nation’s fraught journey toward democracy, yet it was not without its share of controversy. At the heart of the dispute was the entrenched power of the incumbent President Maumoon Abdul Gayoom, who had ruled the archipelago for nearly three decades. Despite the introduction of some political reforms, critics argued that the electoral process was heavily skewed in favour of the ruling party.

The election was marred by allegations of vote-rigging, intimidation, and restrictions on opposition campaigning. International observers noted irregularities, including limited media access for opposition candidates and reports of harassment. These factors collectively undermined the credibility of the poll, raising serious questions about the sincerity of the government’s democratic commitments.

Yet, it is crucial to view the 2006 election within the broader context of Maldivian political evolution. It was one of the last elections held under a system that had yet to fully embrace multi-party democracy, preceding the landmark constitutional reforms in 2008. The controversies surrounding the 2006 poll thus exemplify the challenges faced by emerging democracies in transitioning from entrenched authoritarianism to genuinely competitive electoral politics.

Summarise the 1900 Eastern European elections in a journalistic tone.

Example Output:

The elections held across Eastern Europe in 1900 unfolded against a backdrop of political unrest and social change. Dominated largely by autocratic regimes and monarchies, these elections were characterised by limited suffrage and tightly controlled political participation. While some nascent parliamentary institutions existed, they often functioned under significant constraints imposed by ruling elites.

Voter turnout was generally low, reflecting widespread disenfranchisement and public scepticism. In several regions, burgeoning nationalist movements sought greater representation, yet their efforts were frequently stifled. The elections served more to reinforce existing power structures than to offer meaningful democratic choice.

Nevertheless, the 1900 polls laid the groundwork for the tumultuous political shifts that would define Eastern Europe in the early 20th century, foreshadowing revolutions and the eventual collapse of imperial orders in the years to come.

Disclaimer – ElectionAnalyst.com

ElectionAnalyst.com is a globally accessible, independent civic research and data analysis platform, authored by Dr. Raju Ahmed Dipu, Global Policy Analyst, Politician, and Social Entrepreneur. This platform presents election-related information, systems, results, and democratic developments from 1900 to 2025 for all recognized countries, with the goal of fostering public education, research, and transparency.

1. Educational and Civic Purpose

All content on ElectionAnalyst.com is produced for:

Academic and policy research

Civic engagement and democratic awareness

Historical and journalistic reference

The website is not affiliated with any electoral commission or government agency, nor does it advocate for specific political ideologies, parties, or governments.

2. No Legal or Political Liability

All data is presented in good faith, derived from public records, historical archives, and expert analysis.

ElectionAnalyst.com and its author do not accept legal responsibility for any unintended inaccuracy, interpretation, or third-party misuse of data.

The platform does not intervene in any national electoral process, nor does it provide services for electoral litigation, consulting, or political campaigning.

3. User Responsibility and Contributions

Any public comment, suggestion, or submission remains the sole legal responsibility of the contributor.

Users and researchers must independently verify content before relying on it for official, legal, or governmental use.

4. Copyright Protection

All intellectual content on this site is the property of Dr. Raju Ahmed Dipu and protected under:

© 2025 ElectionAnalyst.com | All Rights Reserved

Berne Convention for the Protection of Literary and Artistic Works

EU Digital Services Act (DSA)

Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA)

WIPO Copyright Treaty

Content may be cited for non-commercial use with attribution, but may not be copied, sold, scraped, or used for AI training without prior written consent.

5. International Legal Protection

This platform is legally shielded by:

Article 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (Freedom of Expression)

International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR)

European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR), Article 10

European Union Fundamental Rights Charter

As such:

No foreign government, political party, or institution may impose legal threats, censorship, or data requests on this platform unless presented through verified, lawful international mechanisms such as EU data court orders or UN-recognised tribunals.

6. Content Challenges & Dispute Process

If any individual or institution believes that content is:

Factually incorrect

Unlawfully infringing

Violating rights

You may submit a formal complaint with valid documentation to:

legal@electionanalyst.com

Our legal team will review and respond accordingly under applicable international law.

Official Contact:
 Email: editor@electionanalyst.com
 Website Author: Dr. Raju Ahmed Dipu (Analyst, Exiled Politician, International Business Law Specialist)

Email: dipu@countrypolicy.com