News Desk
A Maldivian businessman has stirred debate over the conduct of the country’s top diplomat in Sri Lanka after publicly questioning remarks made about visa treatment for Maldivian nationals.
Mohamed Firaq, the chief executive of Inner Maldives and a well‑known figure in the country’s travel sector, wrote on social media on 8 January that he regretted comments attributed to the Maldivian High Commissioner in Colombo, Masood Imad.
Firaq said Maldivians continued to face persistent difficulties in extending their visas in Sri Lanka and pointed to a steep decline in the expatriate community there. He said the population had fallen from more than 12,000 eight years ago to between 1,000 and 1,500 today, a shift he linked to Maldivians choosing easier destinations such as Malaysia, the Philippines and India. He also noted what he described as a significant monthly outflow of money through card transactions.
Calling for relations built on mutual respect and understanding, Firaq shared a screenshot of an article from Sri Lanka’s Daily News that carried an interview with Imad.
The controversy began after the Daily News published the interview on 7 January. In it, Imad criticised what he called step‑motherly treatment of Maldivians by Sri Lankan immigration officials. He described long queues at Colombo’s immigration office and said Maldivians seeking visa extensions often waited from morning until late afternoon while being subjected to harsh reprimands. He questioned what he viewed as discriminatory attitudes, saying he was perplexed that officials seemed to treat only visitors with fair skin as legitimate tourists.
Imad linked the tightening of visa procedures to security measures introduced after the 2019 Easter Sunday attacks. He said student visas were now extended from six months to one year but still required clearance from Sri Lanka’s Special Investigations Service. He warned that the Maldives might reconsider its own visa policies for Sri Lankan migrant workers if the situation did not improve, a move that could affect thousands of Sri Lankans employed in the Maldives.
The High Commissioner did not reply to queries seeking confirmation of the remarks, and the Foreign Ministry has remained silent on whether his comments carried official sanction.
Diplomatic practice generally requires envoys to seek approval from HQ before speaking publicly on sensitive bilateral matters. Imad’s decision to voice grievances in a media interview has raised concerns that his approach could strain relations rather than resolve issues through established channels. The Maldives depends heavily on Sri Lanka for education, medical travel and tourism links, making the tone of diplomatic engagement particularly sensitive.
Reaction online has been divided. Several Maldivian users responding to Firaq’s post questioned whether such concerns should have been raised through the media. One user, Ibujalyl, asked whether the matter belonged in diplomatic forums instead. A former state minister, Shihab, said the comments carried negative energy and argued that a more experienced diplomat would have handled the issue quietly.
Others described the remarks as unacceptable and criticised the High Commissioner for speaking ill of the host country in public. Some accused him of arrogance or of undermining diplomatic norms. A few comments referenced historical political grievances in Dhivehi, suggesting deeper frustrations with the tone of the interview.
Sri Lankan users also joined the discussion. One wrote that Maldivians who objected to the situation could study in other Islamic countries and accused Maldivians of religious proselytisation. Another raised concerns about what he described as radicalised Maldivians in Sri Lanka. A third user accused some Maldivians of abusing visitor visas for illegal activities and called for stricter enforcement.
The episode highlights the fragility of Maldives‑Sri Lanka relations at a time when both countries are navigating economic recovery and shifting migration patterns. Analysts say quiet diplomacy would help prevent retaliatory measures that could affect workers, students and travellers on both sides.
The Maldivian Foreign Ministry has not issued an official statement, leaving open the question of whether Imad’s comments reflect government policy or his personal view.
