Maldives prepares for Ramadan: English sermons, breakfast buffets, shopping

Friday sermons will be delivered in English at one of the mosques in capital Male’ during Ramadan, the Islamic Ministry has reported, as the country prepares for the holy month.

Ramadan in 2012 will start on July 20 and will continue for 30 days until Saturday, August 18.

Minister of Islamic Affairs Sheikh Mohamed Shaheem Ali Saeed told local media that the ministry has received several requests for English sermons from expatriates living in Maldives.

“We have decided to try it out during Ramadan, because there are several foreign diplomats and teachers in Maldives,” Shaheem told Sun Online. “They don’t understand the sermon delivered in Dhivehi. They are more likely to be educated and informed if the sermon is given in English.”

Requests have been forwarded to the Al Azhar University to send scholars to deliver the sermons, the ministry says.

The mosque at which the Friday sermon will be delivered has not yet been disclosed.

Every Ramadan, Islamic Scholars from abroad visit Maldives for preaching and sometimes lead the congregation in the Taraweeh, special evening prayers in which long portions of the Qur’an are recited.

Ramadan is the ninth month of the Islamic calendar. It is a time of fasting, is one of the five pillars of Islam and represents a form of worship to Allah. Each day during this month, Muslims all over the world abstain from eating, drinking, sex, smoking, as well as participating in anything that is ill-natured or excessive; from dawn until the sun sets.

For centuries the locals have observed fasting with unique religious and non-religious traditions.

Maldivians make generous donations to Zakaath (Alms) funds and congregations at the mosques grow noticeably during Ramadan. Both expatriates and locals swarm the mosques, which offer dates and water for breaking the fast.

Furthermore, each year as Ramadan draws near, people buy new furniture and kitchenware and remake their homes – an opportunity the shops do not fail to take full advantage of.

Shops across the country, big or small, prepare for the “Pre-Ramadan shopping rush” with discounted prices and promotions. The largest crowd of shoppers will be spotted at the Night Market, annual bazaar organised by the Maldives National Chamber of Commerce and Industry (MNCCI). This year’s 10-day bazaar will open on July 1.

Meanwhile, the shops selling electronics to furniture have started their Ramadan sales.

The security forces will similarly gear up to patrol streets to keep the crime rates low, especially the robberies, while people are engaged in worship and work.

Allowances mandated to be paid under the Employment Act for Ramadan, short working hours, and the special discounted packages offered by service providers are also reasons why many eagerly await this month.

Restaurants are also seen changing menus and preparing  the “breakfast buffet” adverts, as several families and friends gather in restaurants to break the fast outside homes. Those who stay at home, are likely to indulge in home-made buffet ranging from short eats to traditional curries and rice.

Meanwhile, Ramadan means good business for the market in capital Male’, selling locally produced furits and vegetables. Several people swarm around the area to buy fresh and colorful  papayas, bananas or – the Maldivian’s all-time favourite – watermelons, which are especially harvested on the islands for Ramadan.

Furthermore, an increase in evening sports events, and entertainment programs on TV channels are also elements families looks forward to during Ramadan – although some scholars have been critically outspoken about these “Non-Islamic” traditions.

After a month of fasting, the country will celebrate Eid ul-Fitr with millions of Muslim across the globe with prayers and festivities.


Comment: Shariah not a solution

Yesterday, the Adhaalath party organised a large rally at the tsunami monument in Male’, to demand the implementation of Islamic Shariah in the Maldives.

The party was joined by “hundreds” of pseudo-religious NGOs whi lent their collective voice to the clamour for Shariah, supposedly an antidote to ‘murder, violent assaults, robbery, rape and drug abuse’ in the country.

“The whole nation is threatened and institutions have failed,” the party said in a statement. The ‘only solution’, according to large banners put up across Male’, is Islamic Shariah.

What the Adhaalath Party and its friends fail to mention here is that by ‘Islamic Shariah’, they’re referring to a single interpretation of Shariah suitable to their rigid world-view – a minority opinion among the world’s many Muslim schools of thought that all hold different views of Shariah.

Lady Injustice

One common criticism of clergy-controlled Shariah is the perceived injustice towards women. While these concerns are often met with heated denial, they’re also backed up by cold statistics.

In 2009, then Minivan News Editor, Mariyam Omidi, wrote a damning report highlighting the strong gender discrepancy in the meting out of punishment for ‘fornication’ in the Maldives. According to government statistics cited in the report, out of 184 people sentenced to lashing for ‘fornication’ under Shariah law, 146 were women.

Following his verdict in June 2005, a judge in the criminal court, helpfully offered his opinion that women were ‘deceptive creatures’ according to the scriptures.

Almost exactly two years later, another judge ruled that the gang-rape of a 12 year old girl by four axe-wielding men who’d broken in through her bedroom window, was ‘consensual sex’, because the child didn’t scream audibly enough.

Last week, Mukhtar Mai, a woman who was gang-raped and dragged out naked in front of 200 higher-caste men in her village in Pakistan, had her hopes dashed when the courts upheld a ruling by semi-literate, tribal judges against her.

Given these realities, and a long series of cases where Muslim women have been punished for the crime of getting raped, one awaits an answer from the proponents of Sharia as to why a woman should ever step into their courts expecting justice.

Judge, Jury and Executioner

In Islamic Shariah, there is no jury, no defense lawyers, no prosecutors, no pre-trial discovery process, no courts of appeal, no cross-examination of witnesses, no legal precedents, and perhaps most damaging of all, little room for modern evidence.

Former State Minister of Islamic Affairs, Mohamed Shaheem Ali Saeed, while graciously acknowledging the validity of long established forensic methods of DNA profiling, stated that such evidence could only be used as ‘supplementary’ evidence, presumably while relying primarily on eye-witness testimonies, as practised in Arabia 1400 years ago.

Furthermore, due to the lack of separation of powers in Islamic Shariah, the Mullah is literally the judge, jury and executioner on whose shaky whims the mortal life of the accused rests.

Coupled with the severe lack of capable judges, this is often a recipe for disaster.

Dr. Tarek Al-Suwaidan, a prominent Muslim scholar, blamed the poor quality of modern Islamic jurists on a curriculum that is limited to only subjects related to traditional Islamic jurisprudence.

Highlighting the necessity of familiarity with international law, and current commercial, copyright and cyber-crime laws, he prescribed a minimum requirement of at least a bachelor’s degree in business, law or other specialized field before candidates enrolled for Shariah studies.

Maldivian courts, on the other hand, are plagued by severely under-qualified judges with barely primary level schooling who, according to a February 2011 report by the ICJ (International Commission of Jurists), have also failed to act in an impartial manner.

Political farce

The ‘absolute Shariah’ practised in Saudi Arabia and Afghanistan gives credence to Syrian Scholar Muhammad Shahrur’s theory that jurisprudence in the name of God is a farce by those wanting to maintain political power.

Photographs available in the public domain show the former Taliban government in Afghanistan showing off dead bodies of dissenters hung from poles in public, with their severed penises stuffed in their mouths.

In 2007 alone, at least six cases of torture and custodial death were brought against the muttaween, the Saudi Arabian religious police entrusted with enforcing a rigid Shariah state. In one case, a man was beaten to death for being in ‘illegal seclusion’ with an unrelated woman.

In May 2002, the religious police in Mecca prevented school girls from escaping a burning building as they were not wearing the ‘correct Islamic dress’, and to prevent physical contact between the girls and civil firefighters, which they feared might have caused ‘sexual enticement’.

Over forty people suffered severe burns that day, and 14 girls burned to death.

In the Islamic Republic of Iran, the basij militia brutally cracks down on pro-democracy activists in Universities and streets of Tehran, thereby prolonging the Ayatollah’s political reign in the guise of ‘upholding Islamic Shariah’.

The lack of judicial oversight or accountability, coupled with the promise of absolute power, has made Shariah an irresistible proposition for the Islamist political movement.

The political implications of a ‘Shariah’ legal system was painfully obvious in the original draft of the Maldivian Religious Unity Regulations of 2010, which forbade, among several other things, the criticism of ‘religious scholars’, and airing of any views on religion that contradicted the views of a select few who, very conveniently, happened to be the ones drafting the regulation.

Uncodified Law

When a Maldivian man publicly declared his lack of faith to a visiting preacher last year – he was met with a curious reaction.

On the one hand, the preacher on stage, in a long-winded response, ruled that Islam didn’t demand the death of all apostates. On the other hand, by day break, another set of preachers from a local NGO had issued an outright demand for his state sanctioned murder, failing an immediate repentance and conversion.

The dramatic contrast in judgement between the self-declared experts that – under a Shariah law system –  would’ve literally meant the difference between the man’s life and death, brings to the forefront the problem of Shariah not being a codified system of law.

There have been several attempts within the Islamic community to correct this grievous flaw, by compiling Shariah laws into a standard code. But observers note that since Islam has no central authority to universally  enforce such a codified law, it would depend on compliance, rather than enforcement.

Until such day, the law literally is whatever the Mullah with the gavel says it is.

The deterrence argument

Citing Islamic Shariah, the Maldivian Parliament recently introduced a proposed amendment to the Clemency Act, which would uphold a death sentence passed by the Supreme Court.

The proponents of the death penalty claim that it would act as a deterrent against violent crimes.

As it happens, a New York Times survey in 2000 revealed that American states which practise the death penalty have for decades shown consistently higher homicide rates than states that didn’t. FBI data for 2008 shows that murder rates were up to 101% higher in states that implemented capital punishment than those that didn’t.

According to Amnesty International, evidence shows that the faint threat of a possible future execution does not, in fact, enter the mind of a potential murderer in the throes of violent rage, mental illness, calm cold-bloodedness, or sheer panic.

Human Law

A vast majority of the world’s Muslims live under secular, constitutional law.

Even though laws in Pakistan and Malaysia are influenced by Shariah,  they have regular courts and cede ultimately authority unto the constitution, rather than the clergy.

Many secular countries like Britain, India and the Philippines allow religious discretion in civil and domestic affairs governing marriages, divorce and inheritance, but for criminal cases, they all employ modern law – with constitutional remedies, inviolable rights, principles of equality before law, provisions for appeals and the benefit of forensic evidences that has helped ensured justice for rape and murder victims even several years after a crime is committed.

A new thinking

In a sermon at the American Centre of the National Library last year, Imam Khalid Latif said that even non Muslims and people guilty of various sins felt free to openly speak their minds to the Prophet, without fear or hesitation, and fully expecting a patient hearing.

Times have clearly changed, as Islamist resentment against differing opinions has increasingly expressed itself as violent attacks on intellectuals and liberal reformists, further expanding the shadow of fear and intimidation under which Islamists operate.

Ibn Rushd, the celebrated philosopher from the Islamic Golden Age, also said that revelation and reason are not contradictory, but complementary.

Swiss born intellectual Professor Tariq Ramadan, one of Foreign Policy magazine’s Top 100 Global Thinkers of 2009, argues that the Qur’an should be interpreted in the changed historical context of modern times.

Citing a German law demanding equal treatment of sexes as an example of  proper Shariah, Ramadan asserted that “There are laws coming from non-Muslim minds that are more Islamic than laws coming from Muslim minds in Islamic countries.”

Indeed, those who swear by the immutability of God’s law, ignore the fact that Shariah has been compiled, polished, amended and refined by Islamic jurists for centuries after the Prophet’s death.

Dr. Abdul Fatah Idris, Head of Comparative Jurisprudence at Al-Azhar University agrees that with changing times, the traditional classical jurisprudence is no longer sufficient, and a ‘new thinking’ is required to deal with a changing society.

The failure of Islamic Shariah in modern times reflects this failure of the clergy class to adapt to changing times.

As with others before them, politicians in the Maldives are projecting an alluring vision of an idealistic sin free society to a disgruntled public as ‘Shariah’ – ignoring the fact that it has been a staggering, disastrous failure in every other modern nation that has experimented with clergy justice.

While loudly touted by vested interests as ‘the only solution’, Shariah is unfortunately ill-equipped to solve the average modern Muslim’s daily problems, and unlike modern law, has demonstrably failed to ensure justice and security for men and women in every part of the Muslim world.

All comment pieces are the sole view of the author and do not reflect the editorial policy of Minivan News. If you would like to write an opinion piece, please send proposals to [email protected]

Comment: When we just can’t agree

This article originally appeared on the website of Idris Tawfiq. Republished with permission.

Some time back, the Russian foreign minister was interviewed by a British journalist on television. The journalist gave him a hard time, but the minister seemed able to give back as good as he was getting! He was asked if he thought relations between the United States and Russia had worsened over the last few years, especially since both countries seemed to be criticising each other a lot at the moment.

The foreign minister’s reply was very clever. He said that because of these criticisms, he thought relations between the two countries were actually better rather than worse because only real friends can offer constructive criticisms of each other.

It isn’t our aim here to talk politics or about relations between the world’s powers, but this incident is a good starting point for us to talk about relationships and about how we fit into the whole scheme of things. There are times in our lives when we don’t agree with others. We might disagree with members of our family. We might disagree with close friends. We might even find ourselves in disagreement with some teaching at the mosque or with the society in which we live.

This needn’t mean the end of the world. It just means that at times we just can’t agree, for a variety of reasons. It could be that we are just digging our heels in and being awkward — it does happen!

It could be that we are not really getting our own point across well and so we are being misunderstood. It could be that we don’t fully understand the other. The important thing is that disagreements need not signal the end of a relationship or a breakdown in communication. In fact, disagreements can often, in a strange way, strengthen relationships.

Take the first years of marriage, for example. After the rosy period of first settling down together, little things start to happen that can annoy us. We begin to realize that we haven’t married Mr Perfect or Miss World, and we begin to get annoyed and find ourselves arguing over things that really aren’t that important at all. This doesn’t mean the end of the marriage. It just means we are realising that there are two people involved here and we need a bit of give-and-take for the marriage to work.

If you want to paint the living room red and your spouse wants it white, the marriage need not break up. You have to come to a compromise. At other times, though, there are things you won’t agree on. You support one political party, for example, and your spouse supports another. You will have to learn to disagree, respecting what the other one wants. We don’t need to make our loved ones agree with us in everything for us to carry on loving them.

A real friend is someone in life who can disagree with you and yet still be your friend. A real friend respects who you are and loves you for who you are, but can still tell you things you might not want to hear.

Only a real friend can tell you how stupid you look in that particular outfit. Only a real friend can tell you what a fool you are being by behaving in a certain way. Only a real friend can tell you that you should be praying when you are not. We listen to what friends have to say because we know that when they criticise something we do, it is not an attack on us but a criticism of our behavior. Real friends are often the ones who can tell us what is staring us in the face. We don’t need to reject them if they disagree with us or hold a different point of view.

There are many occasions, then, when we have to admit that we don’t agree. After having tried everything, we need to accept that there are times when we just can’t agree all the time. This will happen in the family, with parents, or with brothers and sisters. It will happen with the broader issues of what is going on in society.

Sometimes we need to speak out against what we believe is wrong in our society, but we still need to respect the right of others not to agree with us. It may be that after a while our opinions begin to converge, either at home or in the broader community, and we realise that there isn’t such a big difference after all. The important word is respect. Our opinions deserve the respect of others, and we should give to others the same respect we are looking for.

As Muslims we should be the most caring nation. Six years after leaving Makkah, our Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) signed a peace treaty, the Treaty of Hudaibiyah, with his enemies. This didn’t mean that he agreed with the idol worshipers or with what they believed, but that for the sake of Islam he was prepared to disagree with them for the time being. The treaty didn’t mean he became their friends, either. It just meant that it was wise to make peace despite their disagreements. In the Qur’an, Almighty Allah describes this peace treaty in the following terms:

“Verily We have granted thee a manifest victory. ” (Al-Fath 48:1)

The victory was peace. The Muslims didn’t set aside their differences with the Makkans. They didn’t pretend that all was well between them. They just admitted that there were big differences and they would leave them on hold for the moment, allowing Almighty Allah to solve them. This peace treaty, broken very soon by the Makkans, led the way to the conquest of Makkah.

So in our own lives there are times when we just can’t agree. We need to use these occasions to grow. We need them to become sure of what we really believe. We need them to develop relationships and to understand where we stand in the scheme of things. We are always attentive, as Muslims, to what our community is saying, and we take examples from the life of our beloved Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him).

Disagreeing with others does not make us odd. It is quite normal and quite healthy, and it will lead us to be better people and better Muslims. Almighty Allah knows what is best for us. By trusting in Him we can’t go wrong.

Idris Tawfiq is a British Muslim writer and broadcaster.

All comment pieces are the sole view of the author and do not reflect the editorial policy of Minivan News. If you would like to write an opinion piece, please send proposals to [email protected]


Comment: Playing God’s Advocate

‘Ambiguities’ are stalling the speedy passage of The Regulations to Protect Maldivian Religious Unity. If this document does not get on the government gazette ASAP, this country will degenerate into religious chaos.

Evidence clearly shows Maldivian religious unity to be a perilous façade, having managed to endure without legal enforcement (apart from the small matter of the constitutional stipulation that every citizen be a Muslim for only 800 years).

As citizens who are so closely consulted in the open and democratic lawmaking process of the country, it is our duty to highlight the problem areas so the Ministry can move rapidly to pass The Regulations and pre-empt the imminent religious war.

What is unambiguous about The Regulations is that The Ministry of Islamic Affairs is The Supreme Entity. Omniscient, but not omnipresent, it will choose a learned group to act as its eyes and ears in society. This select group, or The Board, will report to The Ministry any utterances, actions and opinions expressed or held by unlicensed-scholars, citizens and/or visiting aliens/infidels deemed to possess the potential for creating religious disunity.

Recognising the gravity of The Board’s responsibility, The Ministry has set the appointment criteria very high indeed. Members must: (1) be at least 25 years old; (2) possess at least a first degree in Islamic Studies or law; and (3) should not have committed an act defined as a punishable crime in Islam.

Given how difficult it would be to find a 25-year-old graduate who has not fornicated, The Board has the potential to become one of the most exclusive gentlemen’s clubs in the world.

The Regulations states as its raison d’être ever-increasing disputes between religious scholars that threaten to tear the country apart (Article 1.2). The Mullah to Mere-mortal ratio has not yet been tallied in the Maldives, but evidence suggests it could easily be 1:2.

In such a situation, The Regulations will prove invaluable in helping us distinguish the ersatz scholar from the genuine Sheikh. Besides, ‘the liberals’ have long agitated for the government to muzzle over-zealous Mullahs, so it is now time to make a gracious retreat on the issue, happy in the knowledge that your local Mullah is not just any Mullah, but a bona fide Mullah With a License to Preach.

Chapter 4 states that it is a requirement of every Maldivian citizen to actively protect Islam (Article 4.21). Is this a legal requirement? And what does the duty entail? What exactly is it that we need to peel our eyes and cock our ears for? And how do we go about reporting our suspicions and findings? Would there be a 24-hour Infidel Alert hotline manned by a Licensed Mullah?

The Regulations bans any religion other than Islam from all public discourse. Being citizens active in protecting Islam, should we from now on categorically deny other religions exist, or is it sufficient to regard Them with condescension and/or loathing whence acknowledgement is required? Article 6.32 bans any utterance or action that is insulting to Islam in any way. What is the definition of the term ‘insulting to Islam’? Would, say, leaving out the PBUH after Prophet Mohamed be deemed an insult? Or does it have to be material such as those published by the Danish newspaper Jyllands-Posten in 2005 before it is found to be insulting? What is an utterance that constitutes an insult against a mosque? Would criticism of its architecture – say the suggestion that its dome would have looked better if elevated five inches more – amount to an insult, or would the criticism have to take in the state of its badly landscaped garden, too, before it is deemed an Offence Against a Mosque?

Non-Muslim expatriates in the Maldives – best wean yourselves off the habit of holding garage sales to sell religious memorabilia at discount prices like you invariably do every Sunday ‘back home where you come from’. Any such sale in the Maldives would flout The Regulations (Article 34.a), so resist the temptation to make a quick buck, and firmly turn away the Maldivians queuing outside, desperate to get their grubby apostate hands on your old rosary beads or your Krishna statue for a Bai Rufiyaa.

You should also be aware that even though religion is most likely to have been your favourite conversation starter and probably the source of your best pick-up lines back home, it will not aid your hectic social life on this island paradise in a similar manner. In fact, Article 34.b makes it safer to drop religion from your vocabulary altogether. As a precautionary measure, before The Regulations are passed, you should try and remove any reflexive exclamations that may have embedded themselves in your oral register over the years such as ‘Oh my God!, ‘Jesus!’, ‘Harey Raam!’, etc. If you are more accustomed to saying ‘Jesus [insert expletive] Christ!’, however, it might help your plea of mitigation. Remember, though, a precedent is yet to be set, so proceed with caution.

Article 6.35 is a veritable quagmire of ambiguity. What constitutes a television programme or a written publication that is offensive or insulting to Islam? Where do we look to for guidance? The Taliban? The Emirates? Saudi Arabia? Insulting to whose version of Islam? Can a woman be shown wearing a bikini, or should a burqa be superimposed on her image before she appears on our airwaves? Does every shot of a church, temple and/or synagogue have to be removed from any film that a Maldivian watches? What does it mean that all advertisements should be ‘respectful of the beautiful customs of Islam’ (6.35c)? Apart from beauty being an entirely subjective concept, does this mean that only veiled women can appear in advertisements now? What if she is selling shampoo? Will all Gillette advertisements have to be axed? Books, too, are to be screened by The Board before it is available for Maldivian consumption (Article 31). If this gives us some reprieve from ‘literature’ such as The DaVinci Code, such a regulation might not be entirely without merit, but hardly justifies a group of 25-year-old male graduate virgins deciding our choice of reading matter.

Can The Ministry please clarify why it is necessary to burn the house down to roast the pig?

It has been a surprisingly risky business highlighting the ‘ambiguities’ in The Regulations. This article contains the p-word; names someone whom over a billion non-Muslims regard as the Son of God; allows Lord Krishna a cameo appearance; speaks of women in bikinis; discusses an instrument of shaving for men; and mentions places of worship other than a mosque.

Would The Regulations be applied retrospectively? If Sheikh Shaheem of The Ministry is to be taken at his word, the consequences may not be too dire. Even if found guilty of the Offence of Mockery, he has assured, the author will not be imprisoned, but will receive ‘counselling’. Whether ‘counselling’ involves a psychiatrist’s couch, one-on-one preaching sessions with a Licensed Mullah, or water-boarding, remains undefined and open to interpretation. As is much of The Regulations.

Criminalising (dis)belief will never be free of ambiguities.

All comment pieces are the sole view of the author and do not reflect the editorial policy of Minivan News. If you would like to write an opinion piece, please send proposals to [email protected]


Comment: ‘Terrorists are just bandits’

Extract from a speech given by His Excellency Vladimir P Mikhalov, Ambassador of the Russian Federation to the Maldives, to mark the opening of the ‘Muslims of Russia’ exhibition in Malé.

Unfortunately I have to change my proposed speech. Just two days ago in Moscow terrorists planted two explosives killing 38 people and injuring dozens of innocents.

The law enforcement agencies of Russia have already established that the terrorist attack was conducted by two female suicide bombers from the northern Caucasus Mountains.

This region is populated mostly by Muslims and unfortunately around 20 years ago, just after disintegration of the Soviet Union, some selfish local leaders decided to take advantage of the weakness of the central government and create their own small kingdoms.

By calling on terrorist and anti-Russian circles from abroad, they declared ‘jihad’ on Russia and started their fighting.

But they were not supported by the majority of people were condemned by the Islamic spiritual leaders of the region. That’s why they were defeated and peace in general was restored.

Nevertheless up to now their remnants continue to be financed from abroad by interests attempting to destabilise the situation in Russia through terrorist attacks.

I should tell you that neither Russia’s government nor its people have ever associated terrorism with Islam and we have strongly stood against [this assumption] in all international foreign affairs.

We believe that terrorists have neither religion nor nationality – they are just bandits. Throughout the whole history of our country Christians and Muslims have lived side-by-side in peace a thousand years, which proves that peace is a natural thing among those who truly believe in one all-mighty and love their brothers and sisters regardless of their nationality and confession.

Islam is currently the second most widely professed religion in the Russian Federation with more than 20 million out of Russia’s 145 million being Muslim. There are Muslims in the Russian government, in the Parliament, in all ministries and for example, the Director of the Russian Cultural Centre in Colombo is also Muslim as is his wife.

But as we say in Russia: “better to see once than to hear hundred times”.

That’s why we decided to bring these photographs to Male’ and show you the beautiful mosques in various parts of Russia; modern Madrassas where thousands of people freely study Islam and the Holy Qur’an – Muslim men, women, children and elders in everyday life.

I wish the friendly people of the Republic of Maldives all the success in their development, as well as peace and prosperity.

All comment pieces are the sole view of the author and do not reflect the editorial policy of Minivan News. If you would like to write an opinion piece, please send proposals to [email protected]