rights of parents. This view also underpinned statements of other parents/teachers, as seen from the remarks discussed earlier in which the speakers weighed the rights of ‘normal’ children in ‘normal’ schools against the rights of ‘abnormal’ children from ‘abnormal’ institutions such as Villingili Hiyaa. ‘Where are the rights of our children?’ one parent who was unhappy about the disruptive behaviour of a child from an alternative care institution attending a ‘normal’ school asked. The view was also expressed (quoted previously) that children cannot form a viable opinion about something as important as the national curriculum until they are in Grades 10, 11 or 12. Even then, according to this mode of thinking, a child is only capable of giving a review of the sections of the curriculum she has completed in the school year gone—she is incapable of making a valuable contribution to the actual creation of such a document. This belief that somehow children’s thinking is inferior to that of adults fundamentally misunderstands the UNCRC and the principles of Article 12, and hinders its implementation. Research has shown that to reap the best rewards from children’s participation, children should be involved from the earliest possible stage of any initiative as ‘[i]f they are brought in at the last minute, they have no opportunity to shape or influence either the process or the outcomes’44. The exponential growth in extremist religious beliefs that accompanied the freedom of expression guaranteed by the transition to democratic governance has worked to strengthen the scepticism with which many regard children’s rights and other rights-based values. The person who suggested that the Maldivian State was pushing children’s rights as a concept because they are values espoused by those who ‘wear white paint’, in other words are white-skinned [the intended meaning being Westerner], clarified her position by posing these questions: ‘Is it Americans who should come here and get our rights for us? Is it people from the UK who know our rights?’ She had no knowledge of the fact that the United States is one of only two countries in the world that is yet to ratify the UNCRC. The same person was also adamant that people who do not know the religion of Islam should not deign to speak of human rights to those who believe in Islam. What sort of rights that children have, how they should be treated, and the punishments that children should and should not be subjected to, according to this line of thinking, are clearly laid out in the Baqara Surah of the Qur’an. That, it was said, is all the guidance that Maldivians need in how best to treat their children: ‘Convention? What Convention? Everybody has to go read the Bagara carefully. Go home and read the translation.’ That, she said, should be sufficient and makes the UNCRC obsolete. None of the other participants disagreed or put a contrasting view across. With regard to policymakers, some are fully cognisant of the philosophy and rationale behind the UNCRC and are keen to assure its cultivation nationwide. They are, however, impeded by those who remain ignorant of the Treaty and its aspirations, and by those who prioritise partisan politics over consolidation of democracy and the strengthening of democratic values. Extreme politicisation of the society in general, as much as the growth in extremism, informs Maldivian attitudes towards the UNCRC. 44 Gerison Lansdown, “Promoting children’s participation in democratic decision-making”, Innocenti Research Centre (UNICEF 2001), 10 66