Anni Calls for Candidates to Delay Running Mate Selection Until Presidential Primaries End

Former President Mohamed Nasheed (Anni), the Chairperson of the Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP), has expressed concern over candidates contesting the party’s primary to select its presidential candidate continuing to announce their running mates.

The selection of a running mate before the conclusion of a political party’s presidential primary election has become an important issue in discussions about internal party democracy, electoral fairness and party unity. Observers argue that candidates contesting for a party’s presidential nomination should wait until the primary election is completed before making a final decision on their running mates.

In this regard, President Nasheed stated that "when entering the party election, it is useful to be open to talking with other parties and forming agreements. The running mate position serves as leverage in MDP's discussions with other parties. I hope candidates will not act in a way that loses that leverage."

Of the candidates competing in the primary, Former Wise President Faisal Naseem is the only one who has announced a Running Mate so far. His Running Mate is Male' City Mayor Adam Azim. MDP offered the Running Mate's slot to Jumhooree Party (JP), who proposed Faisal Naseem to be President Solih's Running Mate during 2018 Presidential Election.   

A presidential primary is an internal electoral process through which a political party chooses the candidate who will represent it in a presidential election. Depending on the party’s constitution and electoral rules, the process may involve voting by delegates, party members or other eligible participants.

The debate over when to select a Running Mate centres on whether presidential aspirants should concentrate on winning their party’s nomination before making decisions about who will join them on the final presidential ticket.

Supporters of delaying the selection argue that announcing a running mate during the primary campaign could give the impression that a candidate has already formed a presidential team before securing the party’s mandate. They contend that the primary election should remain focused on the candidates’ leadership qualities, policies, experience and ability to gain the confidence of party members.

They also argue that early Running Mate announcements could deepen divisions among supporters of competing aspirants. Where candidates begin promoting separate running mate arrangements, disagreements over regional representation, political influence and the distribution of party positions could complicate efforts to unite the party after the primary.

Another concern is the possibility that early selection could create expectations among political groups before the party has officially chosen its presidential nominee. If the candidate loses the primary, supporters may have to abandon an arrangement that had already attracted public attention and political commitments.

However, selecting a running mate before the primary ends is not necessarily a violation of electoral rules (of MDP). The permissibility of such a decision depends on the party’s constitution, internal election guidelines and the applicable national electoral laws (of Elections Commission); both of which currently has no restrictions. In some political systems, candidates may publicly identify preferred running mates during their campaigns, while formal nomination requirements may apply at a later stage.

Supporters of early selection may argue that naming a potential running mate helps voters and party members understand a candidate’s intended leadership team. It may also allow the aspirant to demonstrate a commitment to balancing regional, ethnic, professional or political interests, where these considerations are relevant to the country’s political environment.

Nevertheless, those advocating for a delay maintain that a clear distinction should be made between expressing a preference and making a final selection. They argue that presidential aspirants should be free to discuss potential partnerships, but should avoid presenting a running mate as a settled choice before the party has concluded its nomination process.

A possible solution would be for political parties to establish clear guidelines on when presidential candidates may announce or formally select their running mates. Such guidelines could specify whether candidates are permitted to name preferred partners during the primary, whether formal selection must wait until the nomination results are declared, and how the eventual presidential ticket should be approved.

Party leadership could also clarify the relationship between internal nomination procedures and the final submission of presidential candidates to the national electoral authority. Clear rules would help reduce uncertainty, ensure consistent treatment of aspirants and minimise disputes arising from competing interpretations of party procedures.

The issue ultimately raises a broader question about the balance between a candidate’s political freedom and the party’s responsibility to maintain a credible and orderly nomination process. While early running mate selection may offer strategic advantages, delaying a final decision could help keep attention on the primary election and reduce the risk of unnecessary internal conflict.

Until political parties adopt or enforce specific rules on the matter, the argument that candidates should not select their running mates before the end of the primary remains a proposal for strengthening internal party democracy rather than a universal legal requirement.

The central principle is that the party should first complete its process of choosing a presidential nominee and then allow the successful candidate to finalise the running mate selection!