Sri Lanka - Challenges to Peace and Democracy
Presentations at Ryerson University (30 March 2007) and
Scarborough Civic Centre (1 April 2007)
Lionel Bopage
Introduction
The distinction between good governance and an arbitrary one has a significant impact on the maintenance of democracy and peace in a society. In the current era of globalisation, this maintenance has become more complex with the world being constantly pushed towards a uni-polar world, by the exporting of a particular brand of democracy. Mass violence, terror, the rise of fundamentalism, and the plundering of resources have become the end result. The response has been the use of clichés such as ‘terrorists’, ‘anti-terrorism’ and ‘the war on terror’ to describe the situation regardless whether this is an apt description or not. In the process, people’s hopes, aspirations, human rights and civil liberties are dashed in a continuous march towards authoritarianism.
To understand the current challenges to peace and democracy we need to discuss a wide range of issues. However, this discussion will be limited to those challenges relating to the armed conflict in Sri Lanka. Sri Lanka is strategically located in the south Asian region in a geo-political, mercantile, and militaristic sense. Trans - national Capital are seeking investments, cheap labour, natural resources, and new sources of profit in this region. Hence, the conflict in Sri Lanka cannot be simplified to just a localised ethnic issue. Though it is not the subject I will be dealing with here, it is important to keep this factor in mind.[1]
History
It is futile for the Sinhalese and the Tamils to argue about who arrived first in the island of Sri Lanka, but to accept that both Sinhalese and Tamils have been its original inhabitants at least since the 14th century. Sinhalese, Tamils, Muslims, Burghers and others who live there have an inalienable birthright to that land.
Since 1948, we have witnessed the ripple effects of the socio-economic policies of neo – colonialism, in the erosion of freedom of expression, human and political rights and the rise of bribery and corruption. Since 1970s, younger generations of Sinhalese and Tamils who come from very similar socio-economic backgrounds have revolted against the erosions of their rights.
All Governments regardless of their political hue have failed to see the underlying socio-political, economic and psychological causes of these revolts, i.e., discrimination and lack of opportunities. The state’s response of increasing repression pushed both Sinhala and Tamil youth to revolt. The more repressive the state apparatus became the more our youth rebelled.
A perfect example of this was the insurrection of 1971. The fundamental social changes the Sinhala youth expected from the government they helped to elect were not forthcoming by the SLFP led coalition government. So they set about organizing to implement that program of radical social change leading to social justice, which flared into the insurrection of 1971.[2] Whatever the limitations of the insurrection the reasons for the conflict points to major flaws in Sri – Lanka’s democratic institutions.
In 1956, 1958, 1961, 1974, 1977 and 1983 Tamils in the south were brutally attacked and tortured; thousands were massacred in cold blood, simply because they were Tamils. Some were burnt alive while they were at home or fleeing. Many Tamils lost their livelihood. Their properties were destroyed. Tamil women were raped. Many Tamils were shipped as refugees to the north and east, to the land, which they considered their homeland. The state was complicit in this process. So it is not surprising that the gun, rather than the ballot, became the tool for many Tamils in their struggle for self-determination. Reprisals of the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE) have been similarly brutal and inhumane. They have engaged in killings, arbitrary arrests, torture, harassment, abduction, disappearances, extortion, and detention of their political adversaries. Many Sinhala and Muslim civilians including women and children were attacked and hacked to death. By the end of 1990s, the LTTE had become the predominant Tamil militant group by forcing all other Tamil political groups to become associates of either the LTTE or the security forces. The conflict has grown in its intensity and ruthlessness.[3]
The erosion of the civil liberties and the degeneration of the democratic institutions in the last thirty three years has resulted in more than one hundred thousand dead, mostly civilians, hundreds of thousands displaced, who are living in temporary shelters and have become refugees in their own land. There are thousands of war widows, orphans, and thousands with special physical needs and millions with mental scars suffering silently on their own. Entire villages including women and children were wiped out. In the current phase of the conflict alone nearly 4,000 have died with around 300,000 displaced both internally and externally. This carnage and erosion of civil liberties were unleashed in order to force the Tamils into submission.
Democracy
Democracy is conceptualised as the ultimate test of transparency and accountability of a government. Although advertised as a vibrant democracy[4], successive governments have more often ruled the country under emergency powers. The ruling elites have not provided democracy to the ordinary people. In Sri Lanka today, parliament has been transformed into a rubber-stamping institution of the decisions of the executive presidency.
Impersonations, thuggery, intimidation, and buying of votes and the right to vote have been the general norm of recent Parliamentary and Presidential elections. The most significant event that blotted the history of democracy in Sri Lanka was the deprivation of the citizenship and voting rights of nearly a million of Malaiyaha Tamils in 1948. The post 1948 bourgeois ruling elite was the benefactors of that move. Only in the late 1980s did the government attempt to rectify this injustice at least in books, not because of a sudden born love towards Malaiyaha Tamils, but because of the influence of non-Malaiyaha Tamil militancy. The government did not want to have two simultaneous battlefronts.
Justice and the Legal System
In 1948, Sri Lanka inherited the Soulbury Constitution[5] from the British, constituting a parliamentary form of government including a unitary state with English as the sole medium of administration. This unitary state was a colonial construct, imperialistically imposed on a devolved system of local governance based on several kingdoms of multiple nationalities. The new Legislature comprised of two Houses, the Senate and the House of Representatives and the new Executive comprised of the Prime Minister and the Cabinet. Since the colonial times, Roman Dutch law has been the basis of the legal system. At times, it has been reinforced and modified by the precedents and statutes set and interpretations provided by the English law while at other times these norms have been totally disregarded.
In 1962, the Executive took away the right of Tamil people to legally challenge the constitutionality of the ‘Sinhala Only’ Act by abolishing the right to appeal to the Privy Council. The government abolished the Senate in 1971. The role of the legislature as the protector of justice was thus negated. The new Republican Constitution of 1972 also took away the safeguards provided to the minorities as enshrined in Section 29 of the Constitution. This Constitution contained a declaration of fundamental rights and freedoms, but was contravened by the sections referring to language and religion. The 1972 Constitution was replaced by another constitution in 1978 leading to an executive presidential system. Both constitutions were imposed upon the people from the top, with no consultations held and no inputs invited. Both constitutions made Sinhala, the official language, and provided Buddhism, the religion of the Sinhala speaking majority with the ‘foremost’ place of the island, by implication relegating other religions to the secondary status[6].
Amendments made later to the Constitution repealed the necessity of a two-thirds majority for the proclamation of an Emergency, and extended the immunity of President. Despite the repeated claims of upholding the civil and political rights of the citizens, the independence of the judiciary is alleged to have been undermined. The Prevention of Terrorism Act (PTA), the Public Security Ordinance (PSO), and Emergency Regulations often override the Constitution[7]. Article 155 of the constitution allows President to enact the emergency regulations under the PSO or any other law relating to public security. The PSO is a colonial law enacted in 1947 and a declaration of emergency made under it has been made immune from challenge by a constitutional amendment in 1987. The abuse of these arbitrary powers can be attested, by the reports made by diverse international and national agencies on the political and extra-judicial killings by organs of the state.
The existing legal system allows the Executive to politically appoint retired judges to the higher courts, which infringes upon the impartiality, dignity and independence and allows for favouritism by the Executive. There is no separation of power between the Executive and the Legislature. A Parliamentary Select Committee may investigate allegations of misbehaviour by Judges of the Supreme Court and Court of Appeal. Thus, a Select Committee of Parliament can reverse a judgement by the courts. Such practice is unconstitutional and detrimental to judicial independence, is derogatory to the dignity of judges, and makes them subservient to the Legislature.[8] The Attorney General is not accountable for his decisions either to the Parliament or to the Minister of Justice.[9] There is no legal or political remedy against the decisions of the Attorney General.
Many commissions have been appointed to investigate incidents of ethnic violence like the anti-Tamil riots in July 1983, the recent killings of media personnel and members of Parliament; and many political opponents. But given the powers of the state, it is not surprising that either the findings have not been made public, or the investigations did not progress due the interference of the state or its armed forces. Such a denial of justice is a collective failure of democracy and its institutions. It has been one of the major obstacles to achieving peace and national reconciliation.
In March 1971 and later in 1989 in the South, and since 1980s in the North and East, the Emergency (Miscellaneous Provisions and Powers) Regulations allowed and continue to allow the security forces to dispose of dead bodies without any post-mortem inquests. These regulations were enacted originally by the Colonial Administration in response to the 1818 an 1848 rebellions against colonialism. It is said that this provision was repealed in 1990, however, abductions and disappearances continue till this day. The Criminal Justice Commissions Special Regulations Act of 1972 allows confessions made to the police admissible in evidence and shifted the burden of proof to the defence. This legislation was repealed in 1977. However, the Prevention of Terrorism (Temporary Provisions) Act 1979 (PTA), originally enacted only for a period of three years, was made a permanent feature of the legal system in 1982, with provision for retrospective application. It provides for the detention of any suspect for 18 months without trial and without access to lawyers or relatives.
When the Sinhala majority and the government wanted Sinhala as the only official language and Buddhism was offered the foremost status, the cultural diversity of our society was ignored. The proposition that all the Sinhalese who voted for this political agenda did so with an anti-Tamil consciousness is not true, I believe. Rather the Sinhala masses were aroused by the eccentric emotional rhetoric of nationalist politicians relating to the historical injustices meted out against them by the colonialists. The ordinary Sinhala people may have unwittingly disregarded other communities that comprised the mosaic of the islander population who had been subjected to similar historical injustices. We must not forget the fact that this was the result of diversionary tactics adopted by the Island’s ruling elite abetted by forces of chauvinism. The repercussions of the policies were immediately reflected in the effects they had on the Tamils, and a decade later on the Sinhalese.[10]
The Sri Lankan police force played a comparatively fair role in managing the elections up to mid seventies. From the seventies the system began to collapse with the increase in political interference. For example a Presidential Police Unit was created vested with more powers than the ordinary police. Police units were mobilised to subvert the free choice of the people at the 1982 referendum. The election commissioner’s report on the referendum recorded the extent of the subversion. The JVP filed a court case against the way the referendum was conducted and hence challenging its outcome, but was proscribed with two other left parties to cover up the regime's involvement in the anti-Tamil pogrom of July 1983. This made the functioning of an independent police system impossible. In the latter part of the eighties, the police were used to kidnap, illegally detain, torture, kill and secretly dispose of tens of thousands of political opponents of the regime. This is amply documented in the reports of the three Commissions of Inquiry into the Involuntary Removal or Disappearance of Persons.
There was an attempt to implement Provincial Councils, in order to devolve power but the governments of the day unilaterally abrogated those pacts under pressure from Sinhala nationalist groups. There had been other attempts at devolution of power, but so far nothing has eventuated. In 1993, the Report of a Select Committee recommended devolution of power, which entailed Constitutional reform. After extensive multi-party talks in 1997, the then President presented in Parliament a new bill to repeal and replace the present constitution. The parties representing minority communities responded favourably, but proposed 40 amendments. The United National Party (UNP) withdrew from the debate. The Bill lapsed with the dissolution of Parliament in 2000. In 2001, a proclamation for a referendum was made to ascertain the public viewpoint for a new Constitution. However, the President decided to postpone the referendum again under pressure from many chauvinist organisations. In the end, the referendum was cancelled.
Freedom of expression
Freedom of expression is represented by individual, collective and media freedom to express diverse or even opposing viewpoints. Nathan Sharansky's town-square test[11] is used as a measure of meaningful free speech. In Sri – Lanka many editors and media workers have been assassinated, and many newspapers and editors have been targeted for intimidation.[12] Recently senior government figures accused media organisations of aiding and abetting militant activities and put all media critical of the government in one basket, accusing them of being spies, traitors or media tigers.[13] If any media personnel were involved in violence, they may be prosecuted in the courts, with the appropriate evidence legally gathered and dealt with according to the common law. This has not been the case, as the government has used the war as a pretext to negate the freedom to bear and express an opinion on the war and/or the government. In addition, a fact-finding mission by international media rights groups found that authorities were reluctant to probe murders and attacks and were not taking human rights violations seriously.
Sinhala and Tamil militant groups have also acted to curtail media freedom in the country by eliminating several journalists critical of them or forcing them to impose self-censorship. Since the recent takeover of most of the East by the government forces and their paramilitaries, several major newspapers have been proscribed from circulation in the province. The government has not imposed any censorship laws, though columnists have complained that they are under pressure to practice self-censorship. The International Press Freedom and Freedom of Expression Mission report described Sri Lanka as one of the most dangerous places for journalists in South Asia.[14] The government has allegedly imposed unofficial censorship in the northern peninsula, where unidentified gunmen shot two Tamil newspaper employees dead last year. Sinhala journalists in the south also have been killed, beaten or intimidated for their coverage of the armed conflict. The Free Media Movement (FMM) has expressed serious concern that the provisions of the PTA may lead to the further erosion of media freedom.[15] Those provisions are couched in such vague language, enabling the “criminalisation of a range of democratically legitimate activities including the role of the media and civil society and would clearly infringe on constitutionally protected fundamental rights including the freedom of expression.”[16]
In the nineties, the GoSL closed down Uthayan, the only local Tamil daily newspaper in Jaffna, when it reported civilian deaths during aerial attacks by the air force. The Police seized the printing press of Leader Publications in the South for publishing reports on the war, thus blocking the publication of the Sunday Leader and Irida Peramuna. When the Supreme Court removed this ban, the President invoked new emergency regulations to re-impose restrictions on any reporting, the government deemed to be detrimental to national security.
Human rights
Human Rights in a society are expressed by the absence of arbitrary executions, arrest and confinement, the centrality given to due process, and the illegality of torture and maltreatment. In 1994, Sri Lanka became a party to the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment. The convention explicitly states that there are ‘No exceptional circumstances whatsoever, whether a state of war or a threat of war, internal political instability or any other public emergency, may be invoked as a justification of torture.’ Other than these obligations, Sri Lanka’s emergency laws also violate customary international law such as Code of Conduct for Law Enforcement Officials; Body of Principles for the Protection of All Persons under Any Form of Detention or Imprisonment, and Principles on the Effective Prevention and Investigation of Extra-legal, Arbitrary and Summary Executions.
The current disappearances and kidnappings reinforce the sad fact that many mass graves are still to be located in the South and in the North. For example, the investigation into the mass graves at Chemmani was only undertaken after intense protests. But its findings were flawed as it placed the blame on the abductions, detentions, murder and secret disposal of bodies on an undisciplined minority in the military; thus covering up the horrendous criminal activities carried out under the direction of the ruling political elite. The government is trying to toe the same line in the current spate of disappearances and kidnappings by blaming it on a small undisciplined minority.
The UTHR[17] has noted that the human rights violators including assassins were held in high esteem by the state and were granted rewards. Many officers in the forces involved in incidents such as the disappearance of school boys at Ambilipitiya, the killing of youths at Nikaweratiya, the disappearance of civilians from the Eastern University refugee camp; and in the appearance of corpses of Tamil youth in Bolgoda Lake were to be sent on compulsory leave. Following a propaganda campaign portraying them as war heroes, patriots and anti-terror specialists, they were retained and redeployed in the military campaign against the LTTE.
Torture and summary executions are extensively used as a method of obtaining information and intimidating the general population.[i] Since, 1980s, under emergency regulations, torture was and is often inflicted at undisclosed detention centres. These are the local Gunatanamo camps of Sri Lanka. A series of articles and several publications in Sinhala have revealed how the leaders and the members of the JVP were subjected to extreme and horrendous torture by the STF. Allegedly, many were dismembered, packed into gunny bags for disposal by their own comrades, and some were released to go after their remaining comrades. So it is not surprising that the majority of inmates did not come out alive from those torture centres.[18]
Under the current Constitution of Sri Lanka, protection from arbitrary or preventative arrest and detention is deliberately left vague. A person may only be imprisoned or physically restrained ‘in accordance with procedure prescribed by law.’ However, preventative arrest, under emergency regulations 18(1) is not subject to normal judicial restraints such as witness accounts or available evidence. Terms such as “reasonable grounds” are broad and vague and are usually defined by the arresting officer.
There has been no progress in obtaining justice for past human rights abuses although the identities of many perpetrators are known. Well known examples are the "Bolgoda Lake" case, in which Special Task Force commandos were believed responsible for the murder of twenty-three Tamil youths, an army massacre of more than 180 villagers near Batticaloa in September 1990, and the 1980s crackdown on the JVP which resulted in tens of thousands of people being extrajudicially executed or made to "disappear" by the authorities. One of the few exceptions being when a court ordered a retired Major General and two subordinates to stand trial on charges of murder and abduction. It was the first time that a high-ranking military officer had been ordered to stand trial in connection with the "disappearances" in the eighties.
Concerns have been expressed over the effectiveness of the newly formed International Independent Group of Eminent Persons (IIEGP). The implication being that the government will not allow full investigations to occur or genuine prosecutions to be carried out, even in the limited number of cases referred to that Group by the GoSL. Effective impunity encourages political violence leading to a vicious cycle of atrocity and retaliation. Investigations are rarely conducted, but even when they are conducted they have not led to any appropriate convictions or penalties.[ii]
Of the 30,000 disappearances identified by the disappearances commissions, only a few cases have been prosecuted. The reason provided was that there was no evidence. The reason for the lack of evidence was that no proper investigations were conducted, a perfect Catch 22 scenario. The system of prosecution is set up and controlled by the ruling political elite for safeguarding their interests and privileges. The results would have been better if there were an independent prosecution system.
For decades the GoSL has chosen to take no legislative measures to improve these conditions. Publicly, the government has demonstrated an eager willingness to cooperate with international standards, and invited inquiries by United Nations special rapporteurs and appointed commissions to assess and make recommendations on the occurrence of disappearances and extra-judicial executions within its borders. However, little progress has been made in the most pressing areas of human rights violations and successive emergency regulations have effectively reduced safeguards against human rights violations.
The result of this is that the social structure and moral fabric at all levels of society have experienced irreparable damage. Fear and insecurity pervade all segments of the population, as torture, rape and murder have become customary weapons of war in bouts of violence and retaliation. The violence has expanded to unarmed civilians. The brutal tactics used by the parties to the conflict have undoubtedly caused a great deal of resentment and tension between the Sinhalese, the Tamils and the Muslims. The social response to the Tamil insurgency has resulted in even greater discrimination and intolerance against the Tamil people.
Corruption and bribery
Corruption and bribery undermines the rule of law, impedes development, and promotes mis-governance. Therefore in any economy the greatest threat to development is endemic corruption. Successive Sri Lankan governments have disregarded or have purposefully sabotaged any effective established frameworks to fight corruption. Also our law enforcement mechanisms themselves are corrupt. Successive governments have come to power promising to eradicate bribery and corruption. Yet, corruption has penetrated the state apparatus from top to bottom. The media has recently exposed many corruption scandals and the authorities have not even bothered to respond or to deny those allegations.
When anti terrorism is used as the means to gag any debate on how to control corruption, the governance system can only degenerate. Strangely the JVP, the CP and the LSSP seem to have become extremely silent on this issue. In 2004, the JVP raised their concerns about the promotions given to police officers already accused of bribery, corruption and fraud. However, once it was revealed that all police promotions were carried out on the advice provided by the President, not by the Police Commission, they fell entirely silent.
The preamble of the Commission to Investigate Allegations of Bribery or Corruption Act, No. 19 of 1994 clearly notes that it is "an act to provide for the establishment of a permanent commission to investigate allegations of bribery or corruption and to direct the institution of prosecutions for offences under the Bribery Act and the Declaration of Assets and Liabilities Law No.1 of 1975…". Yet it has no discernable effect on the level of corruption.
Since corruption has become a way of life, the political will at the highest levels of government to rectify the issues is almost non-existent. If charges of corruption are laid they usually do not withstand the legal process, and more often never end up in convictions. The Global Corruption Report 2006 prepared by Transparency International (TI) rates Sri Lanka very high in its Corruption Perception Index.[19]
According to the Country Report of the Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights and Labor[20], corruption exists in the executive and legislative arms of the government. Transparency International identified nepotism and cronyism in making appointments to government and state-owned institutions. In 2005, the Commission to Investigate Allegations of Bribery or Corruption did not operate because it lacked a chairman. Some sources have also described the procedure for prosecution on corruption charges as difficult.[21]
Free and fair elections
The Constitution guarantees the right of the people to choose their representatives, a right also guaranteed by the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. Sri Lanka has ratified both treaties. Yet, both major political parties have not respected these rights. The duty of political parties is to inform the people of their respective policies and programmes, thus helping people to make a free choice. Instead the two major political parties have used terror to coerce people to vote and created false ballots, to rig elections in their favour. They have even used the organs of the State for this purpose.
In April 1999, the Asian Human Rights Commission commented and I quote, "The people of Sri Lanka can no longer hope for the peaceful exercise of their right to freely elect their representatives at national, or even local, elections...The concept of free and fair elections has become an illusion in Sri Lanka." The Asian Human Rights Commission pointed to two major causes for the violence and counterfeit voters to “the collapse of the police force, particularly the function of criminal investigation, and the weakness of the prosecution system.”
The EU Election Monitoring Mission noted after the elections in 2004 that the elections in the North and East were the "anti-thesis of democracy”. In the 2005 Presidential election in the North, the LTTE, which had negotiated the ceasefire agreement with the UNP, campaigned amongst Tamil people not to cast their votes, virtually contributing to the defeat of the UNP, and handing power over to Mr Mahinda Rajapakse’s coalition. The Jaffna Government Agent and the chief election officer for the Jaffna District stated that only 1.5 per cent of the eligible voters had cast their votes. Grenade attacks and killings were also reported in the East on Election Day.[22]
Conclusion
We need broader perspectives that help us to understand the complexity of the situation and for developing sustainable solutions. While recognizing the specific problems facing the Tamil community, we must also recognize and address the injustices and grievances faced by the Sinhalese, and Muslims. We must recognize the common suffering of all the people and the stresses and challenges they face in light of the process of globalisation and the civil war.
Yet, the protection of human and democratic rights of the civilian population whether they are Sinhalese, Tamils, or Muslims seems to receive the scantest attention from the parties to the conflict. Successive governments bear a heavy responsibility in this regard as they were elected to govern on behalf of all the people of Sri Lanka, regardless of their ethnicity or political affiliations.
The value of humanity diminishes when one’s living environment is conditioned by war and its attendant effects, bloodshed, death and destruction. People and communities become desensitised to its gruesome realities. The liberators themselves become killers through the process of desensitisation. The propagandists of patriotism and nationalism arouse complex emotions and they play a major role in perpetuating the war. Such emotions are often exploited and abused for their nefarious ends. In the process, we ourselves have become blind fanatics, adamantly believing that our views are inviolate.
It is necessary that everyone concerned about this situation to raise their voices against this carnage now, before it is too late to do so. For it is urgent, to build an environment that can break down these barriers so we can open the doors of communication between all our communities.
We need to build a vibrant democratic opposition to the major parties in the conflict. For a lack of opposition makes the impunity worse. Kidnappings, murder, disappearances are becoming the norm. Moral sensitivity of the society has been numbed by the two and a half decades of war and the brutalisation of Sri Lanka. Only by protecting the democratic rights of all peoples, including those of the Tamil people, their security and safety, a basis to address the current conflict can be found. For when the majority of Tamil people are convinced that their rights and security are protected, the separatist trends will diminish. Such a solution will last generations longer than any military victory, which by its very nature can only be temporary.
The Diaspora and the international community need to strengthen these emerging trends. The Sinhala and Tamil expatriates that helped perpetuate the conflict need now to make a positive contribution to the resolution of the conflict. So, instead of promoting hatred and antagonism and financing war machinery, expatriates can engage in dialogue within and across our communities. This can be done by creatively analysing the situation and developing appropriate solutions for achieving peace and democracy.
Inviting UN backed international monitors with the power to investigate human rights violations on the spot and on an ongoing basis will be an interim measure that could be taken to stem the rapidly deteriorating human rights situation in the island. Creating a Permanent Peoples’ Tribunal comprising prominent independent minds, with terms of reference to investigate war crimes committed during the last twenty-five years may further assist curtailing the crimes currently being committed in the name of protecting peace and democracy in Sri Lanka.
As Dr P Saravanamuttu (2007) has starkly stated “As the space for dissent shrinks, and as democratic principles, practice and procedures become things of the dim, distant past, hope for the future too will recede.”[23] We need to reverse this situation. Whoever values humanity, whoever values peace, whoever values democracy, whoever values freedom and liberty needs to rise up and show that they oppose this repressive political culture created by the parties to the conflict. Again to quote Dr Saravanamuttu, “At a time of conflict and of one in which the human rights and humanitarian situation cries out for help, material, moral and spiritual, one would have hoped that religious leaders and dignitaries would rise to the occasion to spread the message of humanity, compassion, reconciliation and unity, rather than that of hate and division.”
As a person born in southern Sri Lanka and hailing from Sinhala Buddhist parents I would like to conclude my speech quoting Gautama Buddha:
“It is proper to doubt, to be uncertain ... do not go upon what has been acquired by repeated hearing, nor upon tradition, nor upon rumours. When you know for yourself that certain things are unwholesome and wrong, abandon them. When you know for yourself that certain things are wholesome and right, accept them.”[24]
Thank you very much for your kind attention.
References
1. Alexander B.J. 2007, A Preface To Peace In Sri Lanka: Tamil Self-Rule, In Countercurrents.org, Retrieved on 5 March 2007, from http://www.countercurrents.org/sl-alexander260207.htm
2. Amnesty International 1999, Sri Lanka- Judgment in landmark case – another step against impunity, AI Index: ASA 37/005/1999, Retrieved on 5 March 2007, from http://web.amnesty.org/library/Index/ENGASA370051999?open&of=ENG-2AS
3. Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor 2006, Country Reports on Human Rights Practices- 2005, Retrieved on 8 March 2007, from http://www.state.gov/g/drl/rls/hrrpt/2005/61711.htm
4. For example in early 1990, the LTTE massacred hundreds of Muslims in the Eastern Province. Then they expelled about 80,000 Muslims from the Northern Province. They were given from two hours to 48 hours to leave. With their departure commenced ransacking of their possessions. The physical, economic, social and psychological suffering to which the entire Muslim population in the North was subjected to continues to this day.
5. For example, in India, trial of Judges can only be by their peers and by retired judges and not by politicians.
6. In Australia and the UK, the Attorney-General is a Member of Parliament and is answerable to Parliament.
7. International Press Institute 2007, Print and Ink Shortage in Jaffna Undermines Press Freedom, Retrieved on 5 March 2007, from http://www.freemedia.at/cms/ipi/statements_detail.html?ctxid=CH0055&docid=CMS1169823833685
8. JVP 1977, The Constitution of Sri Lanka and the National Question, Ginipupura Publications, JVP branch, London
9. Lankannewspapers 2007, Sri Lanka media freedom under threat: rights group, Retrieved on 10 March 2007, from http://www.lankanewspapers.com/news/2007/3/12915.html
10. Lankaenews 2007, Sri Lanka: Why do they threaten us ? – 'Mawbima' Editors, Retrieved on 5 March 2007, from http://www.freemediasrilanka.org/index.php?action=con_news_full&id=473§ion=news.
11. Lankaenews 2007, Sri Lanka: Why do they threaten us? – 'Mawbima' Editors, Retrieved on 5 March 2007, from http://www.freemediasrilanka.org/index.php?action=con_news_full&id=473§ion=news
12. Najmuddin J 2006, Free Media: Press Freedom, Retrieved on 5 March 2007, from http://freemedia.wordpress.com/2006/12/13/fmm-to-ensure-pta-does-not-impact-adversely-on-journalists/
13. Raj Kumar C. 2006, Corruption as a human rights issue in South Asia: law, development and governance, School of Law , City University of Hong Kong; Retrieved on 8 March 2007, from http://www.law.monash.edu.au/castancentre/events/2006/conf-06-kumar-paper.html
14. Rohana Wijeweera’s statement at the CJC included the following:
15. Saravanamuttu P 2007, The politics of hate and harm, In ‘groundviews’, Retrieved on 11 March 2007, from http://www.groundviews.org/2007/03/01/the-politics-of-hate-and-harm/
16. Sri Lanka Democracy Forum 2005, Presidential Election: Sole Representation and the Disenfranchisement of Tamils in the North and East Retrieved on 5 March 2007, from http://www.lankademocracy.org/documents.html#05nov18
17. The Ceylon Independence Act 1947 and the Ceylon (Constitution and Independence) Orders in Council 1947; Retrieved on 4 March 2007, from http://www.priu.gov.lk/Cons/1978Constitution/ConstitutionalReforms.htm
18. The other major factor was that the fear of greater repression by the Government unless they acted first and fast and went on the offensive.
19. UTHR 2000, Sri Lanka's Human Rights Conundrum, Retrieved on 5 March 2007, from http://www.uthr.org/Rajan/commisions.htm
20. Washington Times, 3 February 1999
21. Wijeweera R. 1972, Retrieved on 15 August 2000, from http://members.tripod.com/~jvp_srilanka/history/buds-1.html
22. World Audit.org 2007, Sharansky test, Retrieved on 5 March 2007, from http://www.worldaudit.org/publisher.htm
23. Zansi A. 2002, Sri Lanka’s Emergency Laws, Retrieved 5 March 2007, from http://www.india-seminar.com/2002/512/512%20abizer%20zanzi.htm
Endnotes
[1] Alexander B.J. 2007, A Preface To Peace In Sri Lanka: Tamil Self-Rule, In Countercurrents.org, Retrieved on 5 March 2007, from http://www.countercurrents.org/sl-alexander260207.htm
[2] The other major factor was that the fear of greater repression by the Government unless they acted first and fast and went on the offensive.
[3] For example in early 1990, the LTTE massacred hundreds of Muslims in the Eastern Province. Then they expelled about 80,000 Muslims from the Northern Province. They were given from two hours to 48 hours to leave. With their departure commenced ransacking of their possessions. The physical, economic, social and psychological suffering to which the entire Muslim population in the North was subjected to continues to this day.
[4] Washington Times, 3 February 1999
[5] contained in the following documents, the Ceylon Independence Act 1947 and the Ceylon (Constitution and Independence) Orders in Council 1947; Retrieved on 4 March 2007, from http://www.priu.gov.lk/Cons/1978Constitution/ConstitutionalReforms.htm
[6] JVP 1977, The Constitution of Sri Lanka and the National Question, Ginipupura Publications, JVP branch, London
[7] Zansi A. 2002, Sri Lanka’s Emergency Laws, Retrieved 5 March 2007, from http://www.india-seminar.com/2002/512/512%20abizer%20zanzi.htm
[8] For example, in India, trial of Judges can only be by their peers and by retired judges and not by politicians.
[9] In Australia and the UK, the Attorney-General is a Member of Parliament and is answerable to Parliament.
[10] Rohana Wijeweera’s statement at the CJC included the following:
“…The SLFP politicians had shamelessly sown the germs of communal discord against the Tamil minority. In the 1956 election the CP and the LSSP stood for parity on the language issue. But what did they do a short time later? They were not only against equal status for Tamil and Sinhala, but opposed even the granting of any lesser rights. It was in these conditions that we became disillusioned with them. That is why we struggled. If anyone willingly risks his or her life, or is prepared to be shackled as a prisoner, this can only be because there is no alternative .” (Wijeweera R. 1972, Retrieved on 15 August 2000, from http://members.tripod.com/~jvp_srilanka/history/buds-1.html
[11] "If a person cannot walk into the middle of the town square and express his or her views without fear of arrest, imprisonment and physical harm, then that person is living in a fear society". "We cannot rest until every person living in a fear society has won their freedom.", In World Audit.org, Sharansky test, Retrieved on 5 March 2007, from http://www.worldaudit.org/publisher.htm
[12] Lankaenews 2007, Sri Lanka: Why do they threaten us? – 'Mawbima' Editors, Retrieved on 5 March 2007, from http://www.freemediasrilanka.org/index.php?action=con_news_full&id=473§ion=news
[13] Lankannewspapers 2007, Sri Lanka media freedom under threat: rights group, Retrieved on 10 March 2007, from http://www.lankanewspapers.com/news/2007/3/12915.html
[14] International Press Institute 2007, Print and Ink Shortage in Jaffna Undermines Press Freedom, Retrieved on 5 March 2007, from http://www.freemedia.at/cms/ipi/statements_detail.html?ctxid=CH0055&docid=CMS1169823833685
[15] The case of journalist Mounasamy Parameswary, a journalist of Sinhala weekly Mawbima, detained for over 120 days without any charges under the PTA is also well-known. She was remanded in custody recently awaiting the decision of the Attorney General. Parameswary told the court that the police arrested her when she was on an assignment by her newspaper, and police did not give any reason for her arrest even after several months in detention and remand. According to the editors of Mawbima[15], the government campaign of harassment commenced when the newspaper published articles critical of the President and his brother, the Defence Secretary. The newspaper had to impose self-censorship by discontinuing its defense and political columns. Special restrictions had been placed on reporting the irregularities and corruption in the government. Then, reporting of human rights abuses had to be curtailed due to presidential influence, harassment and death threats (Lankaenews 2007, Sri Lanka: Why do they threaten us ? – 'Mawbima' Editors, Retrieved on 5 March 2007, from http://www.freemediasrilanka.org/index.php?action=con_news_full&id=473§ion=news).
[16] Najmuddin J 2006, Free Media: Press Freedom, Retrieved on 5 March 2007, from http://freemedia.wordpress.com/2006/12/13/fmm-to-ensure-pta-does-not-impact-adversely-on-journalists/
[17] UTHR 2000, Sri Lanka's Human Rights Conundrum, Retrieved on 5 March 2007, from http://www.uthr.org/Rajan/commisions.htm
[18] Amnesty International 1999, Sri Lanka- Judgment in landmark case – another step against impunity, AI Index: ASA 37/005/1999, Retrieved on 5 March 2007, from http://web.amnesty.org/library/Index/ENGASA370051999?open&of=ENG-2AS
[19] Raj Kumar C. 2006, Corruption as a human rights issue in South Asia: law, development and governance, School of Law , City University of Hong Kong; Retrieved on 8 March 2007, from http://www.law.monash.edu.au/castancentre/events/2006/conf-06-kumar-paper.html
[20] Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor 2006, Country Reports on Human Rights Practices- 2005, Retrieved on 8 March 2007, from http://www.state.gov/g/drl/rls/hrrpt/2005/61711.htm
[21] On September 20, the government indicted former Deputy Defense Minister on charges of bribery. Allegations have been levelled against the current Secretary to the Ministry of Defense. There is still no law that provides for public access and retrieval of relevant government information.
[22] Sri Lanka Democracy Forum 2005, Presidential Election: Sole Representation and the Disenfranchisement of Tamils in the North and East Retrieved on 5 March 2007, from http://www.lankademocracy.org/documents.html#05nov18
[23] Saravanamuttu P 2007, The politics of hate and harm, In ‘groundviews’, Retrieved on 11 March 2007, from http://www.groundviews.org/2007/03/01/the-politics-of-hate-and-harm/
[24] Gautama Buddha in Kalama Sutra
[i] According to the Universal People's Forum Canada and other sources, Mr Gerald Mervyn Perera was taken into custody in 2002 on suspicion of a triple murder. The police tortured him and on a fundamental rights case filed against the police, the Negombo High Court had ordered the accused to pay him one million rupees compensation. He was killed in 2004 and three of the seven officers accused of torturing Perera in 2002 admitted that they had him killed because they feared his testimony would lead to their imprisonment. The trial was ongoing at year's end, after the Chief Justice ordered that the trial judge hearing the case be removed (Universal People’s Forum Canada 2006, Retrieved on 10 March 2007, from http://www.universalpeoplesforum.org/doc/critical_news08082006.aspx) The first person to be arrested in this murder case was a three-wheel taxi driver, who was tortured into admitting involvement in the crime. Later he attempted suicide, unable to bear the harassment and accusations, in admitting to an offence he did not commit. He was saved, but no action was taken to investigate the officers and the quality of their investigation. The same officers were responsible for Mr Perera’s death. No evidence existed against Mr Perera at the time of arrest or his assassination after several years. A belief that torturing people is the way to find the truth was the guiding principle of the police. On that basis the AHRC has stated that there needs to be a serious inquiry into the manner in which criminal investigations are conducted in Sri Lanka. Many factors playing significant roles in the method of achieving results by torture have been also outlined (Basil Fernando B 2006, a special report on torture committed by the police in Sri Lanka, In Article 2, vol. 1, no. 4 Retrieved on 5 March 2007, from http://www.article2.org/mainfile.php/press_release/45/).
According to the US Department of State, five Tamil youths were shot in 2006 execution-style in a coastal High security zone in Trincomalee heavily controlled by the Special Task Force and the Sri Lanka Navy. Although civil groups and members of the government widely suspected STF involvement in the incident, a ballistic report indicated that standard-issue STF guns had not killed them, and the case was dropped. “Some credible observers believe the STF committed the killings using non-standard issue weapons.” (The Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor of the US Department of State: 2007, Country Reports on Human Rights Practices Sri Lanka, Retrieved on 10 March 2007, from http://www.state.gov/g/drl/rls/hrrpt/2006/78875.htm) The University Teachers for Human Rights believed that this incident marked “the beginning of a new campaign of deliberate reprisals aimed at terrorising the Tamil civilian population. It is alleged that behind these executions were Sinhala and Tamil extremists connected to the defence ministry.” (UTHR(J) 2006, Bulletins No.42, 43 and Supplement to SpR.23 October 2006, Retrieved on 10 March 2007, from http://www.uthr.org/bulletins/bul42.htm#_Toc153718305).
[ii] Mr Michael Brinbaum, QC, the official observer of the International Committee of Jurists (ICJ) at the inquiry into the assassination of 17 Sri Lanka staff of ‘Action Contre la Faim’, called for a prompt, independent and thorough investigation by a national body trustable by all Sri Lankans or look elsewhere for assistance. He pointed to the flawed nature of the inquiry, the hasty presumption made that the LTTE was responsible for the killings, and the substitution of a magistrate during mid-hearing was unlawful. The ICJ supported the Magistrate's ruling that the investigation of the case had been inadequate and that the Criminal Investigation Department (CID) should seek the assistance of Australian expertise to reinvestigate the ballistics evidence. The CID has unilaterally arranged the ballistics examination, disregarding the understanding between the GoSL and Australia, whereby Australian experts would assist in the analysis of bullets found at the scene and recovered from the bodies.[ii] The Inter-Agency Standing Committee Country Team (IASC CT) in Sri Lanka has urged the investigation of this case be expedited, both by the police and the newly appointed Commission of Inquiry, and joined “the magistrate in urging the authorities to make full use of the international assistance that has been made available to investigate this crime so that the perpetrators are brought to justice”, and stressed “the importance of ensuring full protection for the victims’ families and any witnesses.” (Asia Tribune 2007, Expedite the inquiry into the killing of 17 Action Against Hunger staff, Retrieved on 11 March 2007, from http://www.asiantribune.com/index.php?q=node/4855)
No comments:
Post a Comment