Government Denials Will Not Make Problems Posed By Navi Pillay Go Away

By Jehan Perera -September 8, 2013 |

Jehan Perera

The government has rejected the public statement issued by the UN Human Rights Commissioner, Navanethem Pillay on her departure.  This rejection has been accompanied by a demonstration of anger.  This is evident in the statements issued by responsible government ministers.  The President is reported to have reacted angrily to the UN statement. Sri Lanka’s External Affairs Minister Prof G L Peiris, whose intellectual powers are second to none in the world, made a point by point rebuttal of Ms Pillay’s conclusions at a media briefing in London. He had said that “the report she had produced was indicative of a prejudiced mind and in no way showed the fairness and open mindedness of an official undertaking such a mission.”

It is said that we often do not see ourselves the way that others see us.  Minister Peiris’s statement indicates that the government is in strong disagreement with the UN Human Rights Commissioner’s conclusion that the government is heading in an authoritarian direction in the aftermath of the war.  Indeed, the elimination of the LTTE as an armed opposition offered the country a great opportunity to restore democratic governance.  However, with the passing of the 18th Amendment to the Constitution, which even some government members criticized, the country has clearly taken a decision in favour of a radical centralization of power.  The acute, if not excessive, centralization of power in the hands of the President, his family members and a few close associates is no secret.

That the government is heading in an authoritarian direction is an opinion that is held by the main opposition parties, civil and religious society and even by sections within the government itself who speak privately about their misgivings.  On the other hand, Prof Peiris has chosen legitimately to focus on the large number of elections that the government has chosen to have in recent times.  Not only has the government held many elections at local and provincial levels, it has been successful in winning them too in elections that have been reasonably free and fair by third world standards.  Unlike in countries such as Zimbabwe, the government has not used violence to stuff the ballot boxes or to frighten voters away from the polling stations.Read More