GMR to begin charging US$25 development fee to departing passengers

GMR will begin charging international passengers a US$25 (Rf385.5) Airport Development Charge (ADC) at the departure check-in counters of Ibrahim Nasir International Airport for all flights scheduled after 12 am on January 1, 2012.

The fee was previously approved by the government as part of its contract with GMR, said State Transport Minister Adil Saleem.

“This is supposed to be standard procedure in most airports, but I’m not sure that all airports do it. It may depend on their development status. Sometimes it’s collected with the ticket price,” said GMR Head of Corporate Communications Mahika Chandrasena.

To incorporate the fee into ticket prices, International Air Transport Association (IATA) must provide a specialised code to airlines. IATA has not provided these codes.

Local airline operators allegedly informed GMR last week that without IATA’s permission they could not charge the fee internally.

Administrative Manager for Maldivian Airlines Ali Nashad Ahmed said the airline was “still seeking advice from Civil Aviation on how to proceed” with fees and customer relations due to the change. The airline expects to receive further instructions within the next week.

According to Chandrasena, the mechanism to incorporate the fee into ticket prices will be installed in the near future. Until then, GMR will charge the fee separate from airline tickets as per government regulations.

Immigration and customs authorities have supported the move, said Chandrasena, although the public is disgruntled at the higher price. “The fee is actually low compared to other airports,” said Chandrasena. “In Indonesia the fee is somewhere around US$50.”

Deputy Director General of the Civil Aviation Department Hussein Jaleel today said he didn’t know why IATA had refused the code, but that the department was recommending that the fee be charged at point of sale.

“It is more convenient for the passengers,” he said. “Some airports charge the fee separately, so this not peculiar to the Maldives. But our recommendation is to include the fee in the ticket price itself, so passengers only have to make one payment,” Jaleel said.

All passengers except those holding Maldivian passports and work visas will be expected to pay the amount in US dollars. The boarding pass will be issued after payment.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Maldives higher education enrollment ratio “about same as sub-Saharan Africa”: VP

The Education Ministry has appointed a special unit to provide financial support to 1000 students pursuing higher education. The unit will be overseen by a cabinet committee headed by Vice President Dr Mohamed Waheed.

The decision, based on findings by the National Higher Education Council, is expected to provide incentives for students to perform well in school as well as to reduce regional disparities and further engage the educated youth in their country’s development.

Speaking at the 2012 Australian Scholarship Awards earlier this week, VP Waheed said provision of higher education had improved, “but there is still a huge unmet need.”

O-level results in 2010 improved with a pass rate up three percent from 32 percent in 2009 and 27 percent in 2008. U-grade (ungraded) rate, previously a leading concern, has also been dropping since 2009.

Last week, the Education Ministry announced that of the 1,515 students who sat for their A-level examinations this year, 78 percent passed in three subjects and four students were awarded for achieving first place at the international level.

By contrast, statistics released by the Education Ministry in August showed that only six percent of Maldivian youth aged between 17 to 25 are pursuing higher education.

Dr Waheed pointed out that only 13 percent of students enrolled in O-level courses proceed to A-level courses. Although this represents a three-fold increase in the last decade, it still falls below the national requirement.

“Just imagine, you have 24,000 students completing lower secondary and only 300 students are entering national degree course. That’s like 1.25 percent. Although we are a middle income country, our higher education enrollment ratio is about same as countries in sub Saharan Africa.

“Compare this figure to other relevant social sector statistics. While 300 students start degree programs 3000 students await drug rehabilitation. Also last year there were 300 teen age pregnancies officially and about 600 young people entered prisons.”

“I suppose we can build more schools OR we can build more prisons.”

Currently, public and private higher education is provided by nine institutions on Male’ and in a few atolls, including Maldives National University, Maldives Polytechnic, and seven private institutions.

Dr Waheed listed inadequate or nonexistent training programs in certain areas of study, as well as weak financial assistance, as impediments to educational pursuit.

Among the factors preventing students from enrolling in university courses is the cost of living.

“Living in Male’ is expensive, and finding accommodation if you don’t have a family to host you is difficult,” said Maldives National University (MNU) Chancellor Dr Mustafa Luthfy, who called the ministry’s decision a “very encouraging development.”

Although some MNU courses are free, dormitory services are costly and limited and there is no space to expand in Male’. MNU Kulhudhufuushi and Addu campuses have hostels, he said, but most atoll students come to Male’ because they can receive support from family members. “We want to expand the other campuses,” he said.

Luthfy said another leading challenge is the quality of education, particularly English instruction. “English language is essential, as it is the language of instruction in the Maldives,” he said. “The Ministry of Education has recognised that English instruction is critical to academic achievement in the Maldives, and has invited native English speaking teachers to come here and work.”

“Most students are enrolled in secondary education, and we have been taking steps to improve the quality of education we provide,” said Luthfy. “We have seen positive results over the last three years, and we hope the improvement will continue in the future.”

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Financial Controller resigns from post

Financial Controller Ahmed Assad resigned from his post yesterday, but did not specify the reasons for doing so in his resignation letter.

Assad had served as State Minister for Finance and Treasury before accepting his latest post on April 8. He is the brother of Housing Minister Mohamed Asla.

According to local media Haveeru, Assad provided technical support to the ruling Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) during the 2008 campaign, and allegedly drafted the party’s manifesto.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

GMR to oversee cargo handling in 2012

Local companies providing cargo handling services at Ibrahim Nasir International Airport (INIA) have been asked by GMR to cease operations on January 1, 2012.

The request will force Bonito Group and Freight Forwarding Services, two of the companies involved, to lay off several employees, Haveeru reports. Fifty individuals are currently employed to handle cargo, 30 of whom are Maldivian.

GMR allegedly plans to provide all cargo handling services in the new year.

A Bonito official told Haveeru that GMR had discussed plans for contract termination with the cargo handling companies six months ago.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

More than 1000 cases of child abuse reported in 2011

Between December 2010 and October 2011, 1,138 cases of child abuse were reported to the Gender Department from atoll family and children service centres.

1,005 cases involved minors while 133 cases involved victims aged 18 and above.

A majority of cases (348) involved children aged 11 to 15; 30 percent of these cases were classified as sexual abuse.

Approximately one-third of the 81 cases involving children less than one year old involved neglect. Sexual abuse was reported in a quarter of the 192 cases for age group one to five, and in a fifth of the 230 cases age group five to ten.

Acting Head of the Child and Family Protection Services Aishath Ahmed said the report said more about the record keeping system than the issue itself.

“I would say the statistics show an improvement in the reporting system because people are more aware of how to file a report. I don’t think the situation is getting better, as far as I know the number of cases is increasing,” she said, explaining the report only accounted for cases reported.

However, Ahmed said people are less hesitant about filing reports than they were five years ago.

“Back then people didn’t want to report the cases, they didn’t want to get involved in other people’s business. But now they can report anonymously,” said Ahmed, explaining that island residents were also filing reports more regularly.

“Before, some people believed that only sexual penetration constituted child abuse,” she explained. “Now, they know more about the different kinds of abuse. The definition of sexual abuse is also clearer, so they can distinguish.”

Child abuse cases are divided between four categories: sexual, physical, psychological and neglect. Statistics show that 57 percent of abuse cases reported were physical. Ahmed said the second most common form of abuse was neglect (17.4 percent).

Family problems such as domestic violence, runaways and complications due to divorce were identified in 14.1 percent of the cases. Behavioral problems including teen pregnancy, self-mutilation, attempted suicide and anger management accounted for another 14 percent of reported cases.

In it’s own report, Human Rights Commission Maldives (HRCM) yesterday said its offices had received 500 complaints of human rights violations in the past year, 74 of which involved the social protection of children, elderly and disadvantaged people.

HRCM is one of several organisations with which individuals may file a report on child abuse in the Maldives.

A report submitted to the United Nations by HRCM in July this year found that physical discipline in some schools qualifies as abuse.

“For instance, the investigation carried out by HRCM on Lale’ International School (2010) made apparent that number of students experienced physical and psychological abuse in the school. Some of the findings include abuses such as strangling and whipping children with belts. The findings of HRCM were further validated when the Criminal Court in August 2010 found the former principal of the school, guilty of assaulting children and sentenced him to pay Rf200 (US $12.97 ) as fine under article 126 of the Penal Code.”

Staff of Lale’ School, including the deputy principle, fled the Maldives in 2010 over allegations of child abuse and other misconducted, which was investigated by HRCM.

Article 10 of the Law on Protection of the Rights of the Child states that punishment in schools should be age-appropriate and should not affect them physically or psychologically.

According to Ahmed, child abuse has a lasting impact on the individual and the community.

The aftermath of abuse can vary by the age of the victim and the severity of the treatment. “If a child has experienced repeated sexual abuse, then as the child approaches sexual maturity she or he may have a difficult time adjusting within the age group. Physically abused children may also develop violent habits in their own marriages later in life,” said Ahmed.

Abusive behavior can also impact children’s social development. “It affects education as well. Children who have been abused sometimes can’t cope with their peers, and they might lash out or withdraw. They may have a hard time paying attention in school,” she explained.

HRCM’s report said the Ministry of Education (MoE) acknowledged that school monitoring and inspection was insufficient.

“Due to the fact that corporal punishment is existent in the education system, it is important that the MoE come up with a discipline policy where it could provide clear guidelines disciplinary actions/corrective measures in schools. It is equally significant that all staffs, including teachers are sensitized to the rights of the child and other related rights that are relevant while working in the education sector.”

HRCM’s action plan includes the public outreach campaign ‘Every Neglect is an Abuse’. The commission has also released handouts informing citizens of the United Nations’ Convention of the Rights of the Child (CRC) and the Convention on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW), of which the Maldives is a signatory.

Last week, the Maldives recognised “World Day for Prevention of Child Abuse: Every Neglect is an Abuse“. Children’s festivals were organised by government groups and NGOs including the Child Abuse Prevention Society (CAPS), HRCM, the Ministry of Education, the Department of Gender and Family, Maldives Police Service, Care Society, Maldives Autism Association, Maldives Red Crescent and Tiny Hearts.

Vice President Dr Mohamed Waheed, who attended both events, said the efforts to raise public awareness of child abuse was an indicator of Maldivian society’s growing concern over the issue. Listing the four categories of abuse–physical, sexual, psychological and neglect–he urged parents not be overly-critical of their children.

When asked if there were sufficient resources for the Maldivian community to address child abuse, Ahmed said the network is growing.

“People can contact the police, NGOs, HRCM, and there’s a Family Protection Unit in IGMH [Indira Ghandi Memorial Hospital]. The cases are also forwarded to us, and we review them to see how best to address them,” she said.

Ahmed explained that a series of interviews, visits and follow-up reports are conducted to evaluate a claim. Sometimes the situation is not as severe as initially reported. “We may close a case when we feel there is no further assistance we can provide, but we rarely close a case.”

Child and Family Protection Services will be working to create more awareness throughout the year. A more specific action plan has not yet been drawn up.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Intolerance growing in the Maldives: Asia Times

The rising tide of religious intolerance in the Maldives is threatening the country’s young democracy, writes Sudha Ramachandran for the Asia Times.

Monuments donated by Pakistan and Sri Lanka were vandalised last week as they were seen to be “idolatrous” and “irreligious”.

Member-countries of the South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation (SAARC) donated monuments to mark the just-concluded 17th summit of the regional grouping that the Maldives hosted.

The monument gifted by Pakistan consisted of an image of its founder, Mohammed Ali Jinnah, and also featured figures, some of them drawn from seals belonging to the ancient Indus Valley Civilization. Historians have argued that these figures of animals and human beings point to early religion. The Sri Lankan monument was of a lion, the country’s national symbol.

On the eve of the unveiling of the Pakistan monument, a mob reportedly led by the opposition Progressive Party of Maldives (PPM), the party of former president Maumoon Abdul Gayoom, toppled the bust of Jinnah. A day later, the monument was set ablaze and the bust stolen. The Sri Lankan monument was found doused in oil with the face of the lion cut off.

Sources in the Maldivian government told Asia Times Online that the vandalisation was driven by political motivations rather than religious beliefs. “This is the opposition’s way of damping the success of the SAARC summit,” a member of the ruling Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) said.

The PPM has hailed the vandals as “national heroes” and promised to “do everything” it can to secure the release of the two men arrested over the incidents.

Meanwhile, the Ministry of Islamic Affairs has ordered the government to remove the monuments as they “breach the nation’s law and religion”. Islamic Affairs Minister Abdul Majeed Abdul Bari told the local media that the Pakistan monument was “illegal” as it “represented objects of worship of other religions”.

Adhaalath Party president Sheikh Imran Abdulla told Minivan News that the monument “should not be kept on Maldivian soil for a single day” as “it conflicts with the constitution of the Maldives, the Religious Unity Act of 1994 and the regulations under the Act” as it depicted “objects of worship” that “denied the oneness of God”.

Sunni Islam was declared the official state religion of the Maldives under the 1997 constitution. This was retained in the 2008 constitution. Article 9-d says that “a non-Muslim may not become a citizen of the Maldives”. While the constitution allows non-Muslim foreigners to practice their religion privately, they are forbidden from propagating or encouraging Maldivians to practice any religion other than Islam.

The island nation in the Indian Ocean is formed by a double chain of 26 atolls has a population of about 314,000. It is the smallest Asian country in both population and land area. With an average ground level of 1.5 meters (4 foot 11 inches) above sea level, it is the planet’s lowest country.

Although religion plays an important role in the daily lives of Maldivians, the kind of Islam practiced here has never been puritanical or rigid and it is suffused with local cultural practices. Faith in Islam has co-existed with belief in spirits and djinns. Traditionally, Maldivian women did not veil their faces or even cover their heads and men did not grow beards. That is now changing with a puritanical version of Islam taking root.

Religious conservatism has grown dramatically in recent years, as has intolerance. A small but vocal group of religious radicals espousing Wahhabi or Salafi Islam has campaigned for inclusion of sharia law punishments like flogging and amputation in the penal code, used intimidation to force women to veil themselves and declared listening to music as haram (forbidden).

Maldivians who are atheist, agnostic or profess the milder Sufi Islam have been hounded by radicals. In May last year, 37-year-old Mohamed Nazim, who professed in public to be non-Muslim, was threatened by the Islamic Foundation of the Maldives, a non-governmental organisation.

Three days later, he went on television and asked for forgiveness. Two months later, 25-year-old Ismail Mohamed Didi, who admitted to being an atheist and had sought political asylum abroad, was found hanging at his workplace.

Some blame the recent spurt in religious radicalism on the country’s nascent democracy. A Maldivian political analyst who Asia Times Online spoke to in 2009 pointed out that “unlike Gayoom, who jailed people like [controversial religious preacher] Sheikh Fareed for their views, under the new democratic government extremists are able to advocate their version of Islam without fear of being arrested and detained.”

Others blame what they describe as President Mohamed Nasheed’s “appeasement of religious elements”. Indeed, not only did Nasheed create a Ministry of Islamic Affairs but he also put it in under the control of the Adhaalath Party, a party of religious conservatives.

Although Adhaalath parted ways with the ruling MDP in September, Nasheed has retained Bari, who is a member of Adhaalath, as his minister of Islamic affairs.

Nasheed’s reluctance to take on religious radicals has eroded his support among young Maldivians who voted for him not only because they wanted to see the end of four decades of Gayoom’s authoritarian rule but also because they expected him to put in place real freedom, including the right to religious freedom. Their hopes seem to have been dashed by the government’s flirting with the fundamentalists.

Full story

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Q&A: Richard Berge, Producer of “The Island President”

Richard Berge is a San Francisco -based film producer, writer and director with numerous credits in documentary film. Credits include “The Rape of Europa” which was nominated for an Emmy award and Documentary Screen Play award by the Writers Guild of America, and won the Audience Choice Award at the RiverRun International Film Festival. He is currently teaching at Berkley Journalism School.

Berge co-produced “The Island President” with Bonni Cohen and director Jon Shenk.

Eleanor Johnstone: How did you obtain permission to film?

Richard Berge: We contacted the press office in early 2009, after reading about Nasheed in the New York Times and different publications that were following him, and asked if they would be interested in having a film shot here about the President’s first year in office. We were hoping that it would lead to a natural climax at Copenhagen. At first, the press office was intrigued but said they couldn’t make a decision until they met us. So we took a risk and flew out here with the sound guy and thought we would maybe just check the place out. But we met with the President and five minutes later he said, “It sounds pretty interesting, I guess I’ll just have to trust you guys.” And next thing we knew, we were filming him on his trip to England to speak to Parliament.

EJ: It sounds like you had an interest in the environmental issue from the beginning. Did the young democracy aspect fall into place as you went?

RB: We always look for these story arcs that will make for an interesting frame. The Copenhagen thing a couple years ago was pretty hyped – that’s part of the reason why it was seen not to be a success. So we wanted to see how it would play out. And it turned out that the President became instrumental in that.

The film was kind of a one-two punch, in a way. In retrospect, the whole democracy thing and 2008 election seems like a precursor to the Arab Spring of earlier this year. It turned out we were there at the right time to follow this. So this transition to democracy after a 30 year rule by the former leader was definitely something that intrigued us. And the human rights issue, and spreading democracy in this part of the world was something that was interesting.

But when upon his election President Nasheed announced he would try to find a new homeland, we thought, “Wow, what a bold statement. Not sure that’s the wisest thing to say.” I think the government backpedaled a little after that, but it was intriguing. Here was a guy who clearly was going to speak his mind, and who was going to make a place for this small country on a large stage. So we saw this democracy-human rights angle in combination with this climate change issue a way to humanise the climate issue. You know, it’s such an abstract, intangible thing. And here’s this country that offers a way for people to understand what it means.

EJ: You said the President was quick to accept your proposal. How did he react to your close following and filming?

RB: I think he thought it was going to be a ’60 Minutes’ type piece. As in, we would interview him and then get some shots of him around the city, doing his thing, and then we would go away. I think he didn’t understand what we wanted.

You know, he walks from his house to the President’s Office. So we would go over in the morning and hang out outside the door, and then when he would walk to the office we would try and talk to him and say, “Mr President, this is what we’re trying to do, we need to be in your meetings.” We sort of slowly explained to him that what we were trying to do was not a news story, but a Victorian novel with one character we were following who was trying to overcome obstacles that would lead to a climax of some kind.

The access issue was a constant thing. But at the same time, I don’t think there is any other country that would have let us do what we did. It’s only because it’s a small country with a confident leader who was committed to being transparent. But even then, we were struggling all the way through. And not just because of him. Going to the UN? They don’t like cameras in there. Going to the World Bank, going to Copenhagen, it was tough.

EJ: Did the President or his administration back you up?

RB: To a point. They would allows us in there, but they were there to do business and if we were disrupting that business they weren’t going to let us stay in. They didn’t want us to interfere with their primary goals. Often we had to make the case that our presence wouldn’t interfere. The President wasn’t going to make it for us, and we had to make it to his counterparts, and his cabinet. He may have made the case behind the scenes, I don’t know. But I didn’t hear him say it to anyone.

EJ: Was there any controversial footage that had to be edited out, that either your team or the government said couldn’t be shown to the public?

RB: You have to understand that we shot about 200 hours of footage to make a 100 minute film. The President did not see any of that footage before he watched the film at the Toronto Film Festival. So that tells you a lot about how transparent he is. We didn’t take anything out. There was nobody saying “you can’t have this-or-that in the film.” So it’s pretty remarkable.

I can’t think of anything off hand that was controversial that’s not in there.

EJ: Why were you interested in following Nasheed?

RB: From what we had read in newspaper accounts he seemed like this really inspiring, motivated true believer in democracy, willing to put his own life and family on the line. And he seemed to speak truthfully from his heart and mind. He seemed like a leader that we wish our president [Barack Obama] would be more like. You may not agree with him, but he tells you what he believes. And so just for that reason he seemed very charismatic and inspiring, but also a rigorous thinker. When we were with him privately he was very down to earth, very funny, joked in the elevator, teased us. He just seemed like a very appealing person.

EJ: If he hadn’t had that appeal, would the movie have been as successful as it currently is? Would it have been done at all?

RB: Making these sorts of movies takes a lot of effort. Especially fund raising – I can’t emphasise how much work it takes to raise the money for these kind of things. We got seed money from ITVS, an affiliate of the Corporation for Public Broadcasting, to get going. But then we had to go to charitable foundations to get money, and it was touch and go the whole time. If Nasheed hadn’t been charismatic, if we couldn’t see that there would be something interesting happening, we wouldn’t have invested the time and energy in the project. But he seemed like the guy who was going to put a face on climate change. And I think we made the right decision.

EJ: As you may know, there has been some political reactions to the film in the Maldives. The opposition party has been terming it a propagandist film for the President’s benefit at the cost of domestic issues. What kind of impact do you think the film could have domestically?

RB: It’s about marketing Nasheed – and it’s a movie he never saw? Imagine a PR firm or advertising firm that would put something out that the subject had never seen before it went to public. It doesn’t make sense, right?

From what I know, I can imagine the opposition is not going to like it. I don’t know how badly they’re not going to like it. But I hope they can see it as a portrait of the country. I mean, there’s a man who’s a main character, but every story has characters. It’s a lot about the Maldivian people and the beauty of the country. In most of the places we’ve shown it, such as the United States, a lot of the audience has never heard about the Maldives. They don’t know where it is.

The movie has put the Maldives on the map for those few audiences who have seen it so far. People have come up to us saying, “That’s a place where I want to go now. It looks like a beautiful place, with interesting people to meet.” So from a cultural level, and maybe from an economic and tourism level, I can see a benefit. Here’s a movie that’s going to show for the first time in theaters across the States – we just signed a deal on Friday – and this is going to released theatrically in Dhivehi with English subtitles. I mean, that’s a good thing for the Maldives.

EJ: Did you get much opposition to the film?

RB: People have been very supportive. The only pushback is that foundations that give money for this kind fo thing don’t hav ea lot of money to give, and they don’t like to give it to films. They like to give it to direct programs, active on the ground. So it’s a really hard sell. That’s why I chuckle when you say this is being seen as propaganda. We wouldn’t have spent as many months as we did trying to raise money for this if it was going to be propaganda. It’s just too hard to do, there are easier ways to make a living, you know? We did this because it is a passionate story to tell.

EJ: How many people do you expect will see the film, in the Maldives and world wide?

RB: Eventually, everbody in the Maldives can see it. We’re showing it briefly now because we want to give that opportunity, but soon I’m sure it’ll be on television here and available on DVD. And in the States, when it shows on television I’m sure it’ll be seen by millions of people in the States at least, but we’re also going to broadcast in European countries, Australia, Japan hopefully, India, so this could have a very potent impact on the climate discussion.

We’re hoping the timing will be good in the States especially. Obama just delayed the decision on the XL pipeline, and so that signals to a lot of people that the climate might become an issue in the election this coming year. And I also like the fact that we have this charismatic leader in a film that will be shown in the States. Maybe people, these Occupy Wall Street and the Tea Party people will say, “Why can’t we have somebody like this guy?”

EJ: So you’re saying the film could promote not a person but a type of leader.

RB: A type of leader around the world! I mean obviously we can’t have Mohamed Nasheed as our president, but maybe he can inspire other people to have the openness, transparency and honesty in discussing problems.

EJ: You mentioned that the film could affect elections on the environmental platform. How effective will the film be for the environmental campaign in general?

RB: I don’t know how it will affect elections here, but we went into this hoping that we could have in impact on the discussion of climate change in the United States. We got money from the Ford Foundation, from the MacArthur Foundation, from Sundance Institute, and what we were saying is, Al Gore’s film was great. It put climate change on the map for people. But it still left the issue an abstract, intangible thing. We knew it was an impending catastrophe in the future, possibly. But people still couldn’t relate to it on a personal level. So we said “We need to set out a movie somehow that makes this, brings this home for people in a human way, in a way people can relate to in a story. And I think we found a person that can carry that story.”

EJ: You’ve worked on a number of films in different areas of the world. How do you maintain a relationship to the place and the issue post-production, and post-release? Where does the Maldives fall in your future?

RB: Well, I wish it was closer to home. This was a life changing experience. To be able to embed ourselves with a president and his government, to see how these leaders make decisions and how they try to have an impact, this tiny country, how they try to have some kind of influence in the world–it’s fascinating. Being able to travel with them to England, to Copenhagen, to India, and see how they relate to those leaders, I’ve never done that before. And I feel like that was a real privilege.

I brought my wife and daughter on this trip because I used to go home from the shoots full of passion, and I wanted them to see what I was so passionate about. So hopefully, we can figure out a way to keep in touch with our friends here.

EJ: Has the work here impacted any professional plans you have for the future?

RB: I don’t know, part of the plan for “The Island President” isn’t just to put it on television. We’re going to have an outreach program that will educate people on panels and at schools, and use this a way to get people thinking more and more about climate change. Not just as it affects the Maldives but as it affects their communities in the United States and other places, and how they can start acting locally.

“The Island President” premiered at the Telluride Film Festival and the Toronto International Film Festival, where it received the People’s Choice award. The film will premier locally this week at Dharubaaruge at 20:00 on Wednesday evening. Tickets have been sold out.

Another screening will be held at Athena Cinema at 20:30 on Thursday evening. As of Monday evening, only four tickets remained.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Blog crack-down “is just the beginning”, warns censored blogger

The website of controversial Maldivian blogger Ismail ‘Hilath’ Rasheed has been shut down by Communications Authority of the Maldives (CAM) on the order of the Ministry of Islamic Affairs. The Ministry made the request on the grounds that the site contained anti-Islamic material, a CAM statement read.

CAM Director Abdulla Nafeeg Pasha told Minivan News the Islamic Ministry has the power to regulate website content.

Pasha did not wish to comment on the procedures for closing down a website, but said “if the ministry tells us to shut it down, that’s what we do. We do not make the decision.”

Once closed, Pasha explained, a website can only be re-opened by order of the court.

Islamic Minister Abdul Majeed Abdul Bari had not returned calls at time of press, and Permanent Secretary of the Ministry Mohamed Didi had not responded to enquiries.

In a statement issued today Hilath defended his blog as an expression of his Sufi Muslim identity.

“I am a Sufi Muslim and there is nothing on my website that contradicts Sufi Islam. I suspect my website was reported by intolerant Sunni Muslims and Wahhabis,” he claimed.

Under the Maldivian constitution every Maldivian is a Sunni Muslim. The constitution also provides for freedom of expression, with Article 27 reading “Everyone has the right to freedom of thought and the freedom to communicate opinions and expression in a manner that is not contrary to any tenet of Islam.”

New regulations published by the government in September, enforcing the 1994 Religious Unity Act, bans the media from producing or publicising programs, talking about or disseminating audio “that humiliates Allah or his prophets or the holy Quran or the Sunnah of the Prophet (Mohamed) or the Islamic faith.”

“This also includes the broadcasting of material (on other religions) produced by others and recording of such programs by the local broadcaster, and broadcasting such material by the unilateral decision of the local broadcaster,” the regulations stipulate. Under the Act, the penalty for violation is 2-5 years imprisonment.

Hilath claimed he was being censored for expressing his version of Islam, and called for more freedom of interpretation within the faith.

“I call upon all concerned to amend the clause in the constitution which requires all Maldivians to be Sunni Muslims only,” his statement read.

“‘Unto you your religion and unto me my religion,’ and ‘There is no compulsion in religion’,” he said, quoting Qur’an 109:6 and 2:256.

Hilath believes the block of his website has a political edge. “If Sunni Muslims are the conservatives, then the Sufi Muslims are the liberals,” he told Minivan News. “I think this is a conservative attack on the site. They think if you’re not a Sunni, you’re an unbeliever.”

Hilath said he would approach the issue from its constitutional roots. “If I want to unlock my blog I will have to go to court, where they will say I’m an unbeliever which is illegal. So I will have fight the larger issue of the constitution,” he said.

The label of ‘unbeliever’ was tantamount to ‘enemy of the state’, he said, adding that bloggers such as himself were afraid of the consequences of being labelled as such. Hilath is one of only a few Maldivian bloggers who write under their own names.

In January 2009 the Islamic Ministry shut down several blogs for allegedly publishing anti-Islamic material. The action closely followed then-newly elected President Mohamed Nasheed’s statement that the Maldives would be a haven of free expression.

Hilath said he was ashamed of the government’s maintenance of its original declaration for a liberal democracy. “I know the President said this was a liberal democracy, but I am ashamed that the Islamic Ministry has assumed so much power,” he said. “I call upon the president to address this issue.”

A 2009 review endorsed by UNESCO’s International Programme for the Development of Communication defined freedom of expression in the digital age as dependent on “neutral” networks “in the sense that the flow of content should not be influenced by financial, cultural or political reasons.”

“In particular, in the case of filtering, the origin of filtering lists and the underlying criteria and processes should be publicly available,” read the report.

The report made three recommendations for the Maldives:

1) To stop blocking websites as was done in March 2009;

2) If blocking is necessary, it should only be pursued following a favorable court decision;

3) To foster open discussions on internet regulation among citizens, government members, NGOs and international parties.

To Hilath’s knowledge, this is the first time a websites has been blocked since January 2009. He believes his website is part of a “bigger conservative fight against the [ruling] Maldivian Democratic Party” and is only the beginning of a new wave of censorship.

“This time I think the conservatives behind the Islamic Ministry think they can put pressure on the government to see all these things as anti-Islamic, like with the SAARC monument issue. More blogs will probably be blocked. I think this is just the beginning.”

The opposition to Hilath’s blog “is a minority of the population, but it’s very vocal and active,” he said. By contrast the younger generation, which composes approximately half of the Maldives population, may take a different view, he claimed.

“The younger generation is educated and enlightened about religion and freedom and Islamic principles. I think the majority will support my move. But few feel free to speak out,” he said.

Mohamed Nazeef, President of Maldives Media  Council (MMC), said he was not familiar with the blog in question. However he said that the media – even bloggers – were subject to the society it served.

“Even when you talk about democracy there are ethics, and you have to respect the prevailing culture of the country and the needs of its people. Even in the name of freedom there are boundaries. That’s why we have a media code of ethics.”

When asked whether a citizen’s blog could arguably represent or oppose the greater good, Nazeef explained that a balance between people and the law was important.

“The constitution must be respected because people are under the constitution. Nobody is above the law. If you want to do something that is not allowed you have to properly amend the law.”

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Parliament passes bill reducing, eliminating import duties

Parliament today passed a bill proposed by the government under its economic reform package to amend the Export-Import Act of 1979 to reduce and eliminate import duties for a wide range of goods.

The amendment bill was passed today with unanimous consent of 60 MPs present and voting.

Among the items for which custom duties would be eliminated include construction material, foodstuffs, agricultural equipment, medical devices, passenger vessels and goods used for tourism services.

However, the bill was passed with an amendment to charge a Rf10,000 (US$650) annual fee for passenger vessels and no change to tariffs for spare parts. While import duties were eliminated for construction material such as cement, glass, tin, aluminium, plywood and plastic fittings, an import duty of five percent will be levied on tiles, which was reduced from the previous 25 percent.

Import duty was reduced to five percent for furniture, beds and pillows as well as cooking items made from base metals. Other kitchen utensils had duties reduced to 10 percent.

While import duties were eliminated for most fruits and vegetables, 15 percent would still be levied on bananas, papaya, watermelon and mangoes as a protectionist measure for local agriculture. Areca-nuts would have duty reduced from 25 percent to 15 percent.

Import duties for tobacco would be hiked from 50 percent to 150 percent. However an amendment proposed by the government to raise import duties for alcohol and pork from 30 to 70 percent was defeated at committee stage.

A total of Rf2.4 billion was projected as income from import duties in the 2011 budget. With the passage of the amendment bill today and ratification by the President, the figure is expected to decline to Rf1.8 billion next year. The shortfall is to be covered by Rf2 billion in tourism goods and services tax (T-GST) and Rf 1 billion as general goods and services tax (G-GST) revenue.

MDP parliamentary group leader MP Ibrahim Mohamed Solih was not responding to calls at the time of press.

PPM Media Coordinator and Vili-Maafanu MP Ahmed Nihan told Minivan News today that all members of the party’s parliamentary group voted in favour of the bill and stressed the importance of “providing relief to businesses” paying GST on top of custom duties.

“By this vote today, we have answered the MDP’s allegations that we tried to stop Majlis sittings to prevent this bill from being passed,” he said.

Speaker Abdulla Shahid and the ruling party should bear full responsibility for the cancellation of nine sittings over three weeks, Nihan said, as the dispute over the convicted Kaashidhoo MP’s attendance could have been avoided.

The PPM council member condemned the ruling party’s “efforts to blame the Majlis cancellation on opposition parties.”

“PPM will support any measure that will provide relief to the public,” he said, adding that the party would “very closely monitor” pricing by retailers following the elimination of import duties.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)