MPS’ Operational Priorities for 2012

Strategizing the policing business got introduced to MPS in 2007 by a Western Australia Police Superintendent who was here on a one year secondment. Understandably and for obvious reasons the leadership during that time were too occupied in the operational front. The first Strategic Plan (2007-2010) was themed and crafted around building infrastructure and laying foundations to a democratic police set up. Both were imperatives given the early days after separation from the military and the democratization processes at the time.

In March 2010, I was fortunate to travel to Scotland and visit several police institutions there to learn professional practices in intelligence. Having benefited from the knowledge I gained over the years and a very useful travel to UK, I was determined to professionalize a business area in police. To achieve this, I put up a team of learned individuals, planned ourselves and got busy in reorientation.

Then came the time to craft a new strategy for the next three years (2011-2013). Didn’t take that big an effort to convince the leadership to seek UK’s assistance to develop our Strategic Plan. We sent three senior officers to the UK, trained them and with the assistance of the experts, developed a strategy for three years. This plan had a strategic assessment, identified priority crime areas/issues that affected public safety and security and also outlined management and governance priorities. In simple terms, it explained what RISKS are there to public safety and security, what RESOURCES we require and how we use those and how do we achieve and measure RESULTS. The Strategic Plan, its associated Action Plans and implementation mechanisms were simple. We had big plans to impact the crime environment through these and in 2011 spent a fair amount of time educating different levels in MPS on it.

Now that MPS has a new leadership, a new set of operational priorities have been announced; Drug Trafficking, Organized Crime, Violent Crime, Counter Terrorism and Road Safety. I do not see these priorities any different from the Strategic Assessment for 2011-2013 and the priorities it outlined. Once cross organizational action plans are put into implementation, we will have MPS systematically working on the priority areas and achieving results. Unlike the last two times, this year we have made police executives account to each operational priority. For becoming more efficient we will have to patiently wait for a time that allows a cut down in public order policing resources. Then only we could step up efforts in response, community focused and intelligence driven policing. Having said this, I understand that a lot of work being done in all fronts though not directed by cross organizational arrangements for the time being.

We all must keep in mind that during this difficult time it is essential that our actions are right in order to rebuild public trust and confidence in us.

You all are welcome to make comments here in regards to MPS’ ability to impact the crime environment we have.


MPS’ mindset and effective policing

The most heavily discussed issue over the last 7 days has been the release of 100 over convicts and the subsequent rise in criminal activities in Male’.  This issue has put immense pressure on the law enforcement arm, MPS. In a press briefing held by the organization, one of my colleagues made quite a statement on this issue that has sparked some controversy. My stand on his statement is that it was too political and was formed from a legal perspective rather than from a policing perspective. I do not intend to deliberate on that statement or the effects due to the release of these convicts under a parole or presidential pardon. My concern here is of the policing context and I will try to give insight on some of the issues that are to some extent hindering the functionality of MPS. Although I have been away from the operational policing function since 2004, I am in touch with officers who are in frontline policing who shares their concerns with me.

Resentment within

It is not a secret that the frontline police officers are resentful towards the different levels of management in MPS. A comment left by an anonymous police officer on one of the articles published on the internet version of Haveeru Daily (14th Dec 2008) is bare evidence to it. The component, Capital Police, responsible for policing Male’ feels that they are too burdened with the job without adequate breaks and believes that they are being treated unfairly when other components within MPS get to enjoy breaks. This is of great risk to MPS if the frontline officers are fed up or unwilling to perform their duties. It is imperative that the organization look into these issues seriously and find better solutions.

Mindset and Culture

I recall what John Robertson, a retired Scottish police officer said in his 2006 Review Report on the Capital Police. He described our policing as to the like of ‘fire station policing’ which means our approach is very reactive. It is pointless to mention the recommendations he put in that report which I don’t see getting implemented much. My assessment is that we still are reactive to incidences of crime and have this traditional culture of asking the superior for every single step that needs to be taken at the tactical level of frontline policing. We need to move away from this practice and empower the constables to make decisions so that they get more involved and take initiative in the efforts to prevent crime. The supervisory levels in the frontline policing need to have better working relationship with the officers out on the streets and constantly guide them during their pre and post duty briefs to encourage initiative and self discretion.

Restructuring and redeployment

I cannot exercise the liberty of revealing how many of MPS’ officers are dedicated to frontline policing when we still have a culture in that we believe revelation of figures is a ‘sin’. All I can say is we have a pretty good police to public ratio and the land area we have to cover as you all know is very small. My assessment is that MPS have too many officers dedicated for support functions and there always has been a need to allocate and deploy more officers into frontline policing. During the formation stages to become a separate entity from the old NSS, we have copied the MNDF’s organizational structure with very slight modifications. We still have positions filled in by sworn police officers that can either be replaced by civilian workers or merged into another function. The likes of uniform section, catering section, administrative units have too many trained and sworn police officers issuing uniform items or doing desk jobs rather than being on the streets to fight crime. I believe there is a need to review our resource deployment and restructure the organization to cater for an effective policing strategy that focuses on frontline policing.

MPS’ Elite

Unlike ACP Abdulla Riyaz’s version of elite force, I call the officers in MPS with sound academic background who are energetic, ever enthusiastic and who can put innovation into MPS if opportunity is given, the real elite of the organization. We have some of the best of people in the nation to steer MPS towards the direction our people want to see us going. Whatever the reason may be, we have recruited or have attracted people who holds good academic credentials suiting to our organizational development. Why cannot we make the most of these people for reviewing our current practices and seek innovative ways for effective policing, regardless of the ranks they hold? We have so many advisory boards within MPS in which senior officers dedicate their valuable time discussing on the simplest issues like the size of water bottle officers are allowed to drink. My belief is that if we make the most use of these scholarly practitioners that we have in MPS, we can move towards change, innovation and effectiveness.

In light of the above issues, I believe we are not well placed to criticize the government’s decision to release some 116 convicts into Male’. I agree that we are one party that needs to be consulted when making such a decision. Even if the government’s decision is irrational or conflicting with laws, we cannot whine about it. It is the parliament’s job to decide on the legitimacy of that decision. Our job is to reassure our people that restoring safety and security is what we are going to do. It is a good sign that we have begun Stop and Searches in Male’, Villingili and HulhuMale’ and the introduction of an old but effective concept like ‘Dhanmaanu’ (an additional patrol shift consisting of police officers from other support departments) is commended. However, we do not have to put Superintendents and Chief Inspectors on the streets to do frontline policing. Considering the points highlighted above, they can devise a sustainable strategy to deter and reduce crime using intelligence as a critical tool. We must not act alone to devise this strategy as we are only a component that is most visible in the whole criminal justice system. We have to draw our partners in the system to work on a strategy that would make our societies safe, secure and tolerant. Before doing that, we need to clean our own backyard.

Small Arms, Bomb Squad and the Elite Force!!!

In a very recent function held to give away certificates of appreciation in recognition of Special Operations Command (SOC) and Dignitary Protection Unit’s hard work during recent operations, ACP Riyaz talked of two things; carrying fire arms (small arms) and establishing a Bomb Squad in 2009. He also praised the SOC by referring to them as “the Elite Force” of MPS. Understandably, they were the hardest hit component as far as the outcome of the presidential election is concerned. Praising SOC to this level is not my concern, however the issue of carrying fire arms (small arms) and establishing a Bomb Squad is; and I hope that this concern is shared by the nation as well.

The new Police Act empowers police to carry and use fire arms in times of need. Even then the questions are; do we need to have our officers carrying fire arms? Based on what assessment or estimate are we making this move? It has only been 4 years since MPS’ establishment and we have a lot to achieve in order to become a full fledged police organization. For me, acquiring fire arms and specializing in an area such as bomb defusing, does not fall under that. I believe that we have not successfully instilled the very principles of policing in the minds of a majority of our officers. Issuing these officers with fire arms or to the least ‘less lethal weapons’ would be an inappropriate move at this stage. I myself have experienced how they use the very minimum force in situations requiring the application of force. One might argue that the current volatility in terms of security in the nation requires us to move towards this paramilitaristic approach. I would counter this argument by saying we already have an organization by the name of MNDF to collaborate with us in such times where we have to resort to the use of excessive force in the interest of public safety or national security.

MPS and Interoperability

I believe interoperability is what we need to have with MNDF or other such services or agencies concerning national security, law enforcement, emergency or crisis management. We need to draw up strategies, plans and protocols and not just leave them on shelves but also put them into practice by rehearsing and revising. If the MNDF are unwilling to follow this path as talked by many, then it is the government or parliament’s role to step in to make sure that happens. If a piece of legislation is required to make this work then be it. Our nation is poor and the world community is sliding into the depths of a recession which would surely have a heavy impact on our economy as well. Keep in mind that economic security is the top most issue now in the world front.

The big question

In light of all this my question again is, why should the MPS duplicate resources or waste money on buying fire arms or invest in specializing on areas that the state already have? Why can’t we just think of alternative strategies and optimize resources in hand.

What’s your stand or opinion on this issue, reader?

MPS’ Way Forward: The next step

My last post under the heading, “the next Commissioner of Police”, attracted many readers both within MPS and the public. As an officer committed for progression, the discussions that generated on this issue brought me contentment. Now that we have learned how people view the leadership change, we can leave the new government to decide on that and I intend to move forward to deliberate on the next step.

A New Police Reform Campaign …

If I am not misinformed, to a huge extent, the police reform initiative has come from within MPS since its establishment in 2004. I am not disregarding the focus on improving policing services in the 7th National Development Plan here. My argument is that this reform initiative can be best if it is one that is directed, processed and implemented by the Home Ministry rather than one coming out of MPS. What I am talking here about is the Police Reform initiative which I believe has to be reviewed by the new government. The President, Home Ministry and the Police Integrity Commission are those whom MPS report to or who have the oversight responsibility over MPS’ performance.

If the new government identifies that there are areas that need to undergo reform, I think it would be wise to launch a well crafted New Police Reform campaign. This campaign must involve all key stakeholders and must be led by the Home Ministry. One way to do is to have a person with a relevant background who holds a senior position, perhaps a deputy minister from the Home Ministry, to head a “Police Reform Committee”. This committee can comprise of representative(s) from the Police Integrity Commission, MPS, the relevant parliamentary committee, the Home Ministry and other concerned authorities. Based on the areas identified by the government, the intent of this campaign/committee would be to draw up strategies and action plans, coordinate and oversee the implementation of reform activities.

I have few areas in my sight that MPS need to improve on which I choose not to discuss here for obvious reasons but I will do so on an appropriate platform, when time comes. Therefore, I invite readers to share their concerns, ideas or views on the issue on hand.

You, as a MPS officer or a member of the public, what do you want from MPS in the future? This can be with regards to how MPS can improve its services or the public expectations towards MPS.

MPS’ Way Forward: the next Commissioner of Police?

With the new government taking charge on 11th November 2008, it is certain that the strategic leadership at MPS would undergo some major changes. This in fact is crucial for the MDP led coalition government, given the important role police plays in the nation. Police are responsible for the internal security of the nation; prevention and investigation of crime and the maintenance of public peace and harmony. The outgoing government had CP Adam Zahir in-charge of the police function for almost two decades now. MPS have always been finger-pointed for being politicized, heavy-handed, being used as a tool to repress opposition figures, voices and actions. Therefore, to replace or retain the existing Commissioner of Police would be one among the new government’s important decisions to make.

Do we need this change?

If change was what the incoming government promised to the people, then change it must be. As highlighted above, the role police play is crucial and in my view more crucial (in the current security context) than of the MNDF, especially at this transitional stage. MPS has been embedded with a culture that does not suit to a democracy. Therefore, it hinders the full functionality of the organization which ultimately affects its customers i.e. the public, and damages their trust and confidence in MPS. The current culture in MPS as I have highlighted in my commentaries, is traditional, too hierarchical, militaristic and organization centered. What we need to have in place is, a change oriented and visionary leadership, less hierarchical structure, discretionary police officers, customer focused approach, more accountability and transparency and above all, an overarching modern philosophy of policing that is not rhetoric but put into action and that can also be measured.

The talk

Who would become the Commissioner of Police in Mohamed Nasheed’s government? This is the question that is on every police officer’s mind these days. There are ongoing rumors within the circles of MPS that I would like to discuss here.

Rumor 1: Mohamed Nasheed wants CP Adam Zahir to remain in the post.

My opinion: Highly unlikely.

Rumor 2: Given the ties ACP Abdulla Riyaz has with Mr. Qasim Ibrahim, he is the strongest candidate to become the successor of CP Adam Zahir.

My opinion: Probable. Leave aside the ties. Being the most “blessed” and also one of the most capable senior officers at MPS, ACP Riyaz has the potential to take over. The question is whether the new government would take him as the RIGHT officer to put in-charge!

Rumor 3: SDCP (Retired) Ibrahim Latheef being called in for the job.

My opinion: Probable and recommended. Currently based in Perth, Australia, Ibrahim Latheef is well qualified for the job. The experience and academic credentials that he holds, puts him in a much stronger position than ACP Riyaz to lead MPS. While the reasons for his resignation are still unclear to me, there are many who believe that Ibrahim Latheef could steer MPS in the right direction of modern policing.

If this is my call …

I have two recommendations for the MDP led coalition government on the issue of putting a leader at MPS. If my recommendations are incompatible with the existing Police Act, then I suggest the necessary amendments be made.

Recommendation 1:

Bring in a totally new person into MPS, who has a strong academic, leadership background and vast experience in public service. He/She has to be a no-nonsense, change oriented and a person with good temperament and judgment.

Recommendation: 2

Hire a foreign senior police officer from the UK or Australia for a term of 4 years to fill in the post of the commissioner. His responsibility must be to over haul the current structures and change the managerial and cultural philosophy in MPS that would suit for a democratic police set up. During his tenure he would have to identify a senior officer that he would mentor to take over from him.

It has been a practice in recent times to borrow or hire highly professional police officers from overseas. One case is of an Assistant Commissioner of the Australian Federal Police, Andy Hughes who took charge as the Commissioner of Police of the Fiji Police Force.


My rationale for these two recommendations is articulated above, under the sub heading: Do we need this change. What I believe is, with the existing leadership in MPS, it would be difficult to implement much needed changes. MPS had the opportunity to foster its organizational and policing philosophy, but it was not received or taken well. For me, so far the change that MPS’ leaders talk about is mere cosmetic and never truly happened. It is understandable that change is not an easy thing to bring in. MPS became a separate entity in September 2004 and has achieved significant advancements. What it has not achieved so far is public trust and confidence. Professional, impartial and ethical policing services are not resembled by our vehicles, uniform, gear or technology, nor FBI Academy graduates. Now that the people who have most alleged MPS of being politicized are in power, the government represented by this people need to bring in these changes. To start with, put the right people in charge at this right time to steer MPS at the right direction.

Policing Terrorism Crime

A critique on four articles that are related to policing of terrorism.

Although there are differing views on how policing of terrorism should be done, all four articles gives emphasis on the importance of police leading the way at the local level.

Connors & Pelligrini (2005) talks about the need for the preparedness of local agencies to deal with terrorism by developing prevention and response strategies putting more emphasis on Weapons of Mass Destruction. Furthermore they suggest on broader engagement by local law enforcement to counter terrorism, supported by multi-disciplinary teams and a high intelligence capability.

Howard (2004) talks on how police should go about creating a hostile environment for terrorism through the protection of critical infrastructure and collaboration with private businesses. He believes UK has the leading edge in policing terrorism and further discusses its model of integrating crime prevention and counter terrorism strategies.

Scheider & Chapman (2003) and Murray (2005) advocates on the application of community policing philosophy to be more productive rather than the traditional approaches outlined in the other two articles. Murray deliberates on the likelihood of reverting to traditional policing by organizations to tackle terrorism and states, although that happens to be the case, community policing should be the overarching approach to thwart terrorism.

Today everyone believes, traditional security or approaches to tackle terrorism are least successful and requires nation states to adopt a holistic approach to fight terrorism. What we have gathered from the four articles is that police are to play a key role to tackle it. The UK’s model of integrating crime prevention strategies into counter terrorism strategies is one good practice that can be followed. I also believe community policing, that goes along with police – public trust would be an effective approach in that it restructures police organizations to become problem solving oriented. Community policing can also prove to be effective especially in tackling home grown terrorism that is based on constant flow of critical information from the public members in a locality. Police are central to policing terrorism and therefore must adopt strategies that are appropriate to the setting of the community. A proactive role, with the engagement of community and other key stake holders that forms a “hostile environment to terrorism” can be an effective method to police terrorism.


Connors, T & Pellegrini, G, 2005, ‘Hard won lessons: policing terrorism in the United States’, Safe Cities Project, Manhattan Institute, New York pp 4-26.

Howard, P (ed) 2004, ‘Hard won lessons: how police fight terrorism in the United Kingdom’, Safe Cities Project, Manhattan Institute, New York pp 5-18.

Murray, J 2005, ‘Policing terrorism: a threat to community policing or just a shift in priorities?’, Police Practice and Research, vol 6(4) pp 347-361.

Scheider, M & Charpman, R 2003, ‘Community policing and terrorism’, Journal of Homeland Security, pp 1-7

Community policing and MPS

The transition from traditionally reactive, action oriented style of policing to a service oriented community policing model has been the most significant change in policing philosophy. Until September 2004 policing function in the nation was carried out by a paramilitary unit under the umbrella of the National Security Service. In 2006, Maldives Police Service “embraced” the community oriented policing style and went public with this so called “transition”. The collaborative partnership between the community and the police with the process to identify and solve problems is the cornerstone of community policing. There was input and oversight from counterparts which MPS affiliated with, but the reluctance and failure to effect change by the leadership has put MPS in the same position as before. My observation is that MPSs’ timing on the attempt to apply community policing principles was not right. It is clear that public attitude towards police is a determining factor in the success of community policing. A community that is hostile and fearful will not incline to cooperate with the police. That is what happened and is continuing to happen in the Maldives scenario. Another factor is that MPS still has not had the much needed cultural change (organizational structure and managerial philosophy) for a community policing model. Although “Community policing” became a buzz word within the circles of MPS, key people in the institution have the wrong interpretation of it. The failure to tackle recent street gang fights in Male’, is another indication of not being able to advocate and adopt on the community policing model by MPS. Subsequently the MNDF was called in to deal with the problem which is a clear case of paramilitarism.

To my understanding, the three factors that contribute to the failure in adopting a community policing model by MPS are; firstly the wrong timing; secondly the cultural change that did not take place; and thirdly, probable influence by the government to harden policing at a time political environment has become volatile.

MPS needs to adopt a democratic style of management and continue to work on achieving public acceptance. In the contemporary world, there are growing concern for national security and pressure on shifting policing paradigms. A shift is needed, but reverting to traditional policing will prove to be counter productive. Maldives is heading towards modern democracy and MPS, of all institutions need to move on to adopt a policing paradigm that is suitable for a democracy.
Murray, J 2005, ‘Policing terrorism: a threat to community policing or just a shift in priorities?’ Police Practice and Research, vol 6(4) pp 347-361