Peace for the World

Peace for the World
First democratic leader of Justice the Godfather of the Sri Lankan Tamil Struggle: Honourable Samuel James Veluppillai Chelvanayakam

Thursday, August 31, 2017

US officials mark International Day of the Disappeared in Sri Lanka

Home
30 Aug  2017
The Acting Assistant Secretary of State of the US, Alice Wells and the US ambassador to Sri Lanka remembered the tens of thousands of enforced disappearances in Sri Lanka at an event in Colombo on Tuesday, held to mark International Day of the Disappeared. 
"Today on Int. Day of Victims of Enforced Disappearances we honor #DisappearedSL families searching for answers in SL w @State_SCA A/AS Wells," Mr Keshap tweeted. 
The event was attended by families of the disappeared across the island, as well as NGOs and political figures including the Tamil National Alliance's leader, R Sampanthan and its spokesperson, M A Sumanthiran. 
"The culture of impunity must come to an end," the TNA leader told those gathered. 
The Sri Lankan president, Maithripala Sirisena did not attend. 
The Colombo based think tank, CPA quoted one of the participants as saying, 'Did Maithripala cancel his attendance today because he can't face us?' 
Across the North-East hundreds of families of the disappeared held demonstrations calling on the government to reveal the whereabouts of their missing loved ones. 

War crimes: Why not against Sarath Fonseka: SLPP

2017-08-31
In the wake of lawsuits filed against ex-army commander and Sri Lanka's former ambassador to Brazil, Jagath Jayasuriya, the Ex-servicemen's Association affiliated to the Sri Lanka Podujana Peramuna today asked why similar charges had not been filed against ex-army commander and MP, Sarath Fonseka.
Its convener Ajith Prasanna said Mr. Jayasuriya served under Mr. Fonseka who was the then army commander and asked whether it was because Mr. Fonseka had become a stooge of this US-sponsored government that he had been exempted of such charges.
“These allegations levelled against Jagath Jayasuriya is a serious blow to the Sri Lanka Army. We condemn these allegations by the Tamil diaspora,” Mr. Prasanna said and pointed out that proper procedures had not been followed when appointing Maj. Gen. Mahesh Senanayake as Army Commander and Rear Admiral Travis Sinniah as Navy Commander.(Sheain Fernandopulle)

Why a Sri Lankan leader might be tried for war crimes in Brazil


One of the mothers of the disappeared stands beside photographs of the missing in Trincomalee, Sri Lanka, in July. (Kate Cronin-Furman)


One of the mothers of the disappeared stands beside photographs of the missing in Trincomalee, Sri Lanka, in July. (Kate Cronin-Furman)

Early Tuesday morning, news broke that Sri Lanka’s ambassador to Brazil had fled the country. Sri Lanka’s government later announced that his departure was planned, and it was simply the end of his ambassadorial term, but the timing raised eyebrows. The previous day, human rights groups had filed a criminal complaint accusing Ambassador Jagath Jayasuriya of command responsibility for war crimes.

Jayasuriya, who is also Sri Lanka’s ambassador to five other Latin American countries, is a former army general. From 2007 to 2009, he oversaw the last phase of Sri Lanka’s civil war against the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam. The United Nations estimates that more than 40,000 Tamil civilians died in the final months of the conflict. Human rights groups have documented indiscriminate shelling of civilian targets, custodial torture, enforced disappearances and rape, all perpetrated by forces under Jayasuriya’s command.

Despite sustained pressure from victims, human rights groups and Western governments, Sri Lanka has refused to prosecute or punish any of these violations. When the increasingly authoritarian Mahinda Rajapaksa was unexpectedly voted out of power in 2015, the international community welcomed assurances from the new government that it would pursue accountability for wartime abuses. Although Sri Lanka promised to establish offices of missing people and reparations, a truth commission and a prosecutorial mechanism, none of these institutions has materialized. Despite the change in government, there has been no vetting of either civilian or military officials suspected of war crimes. Eight years after the war’s end, justice remains elusive.

For the last six months, families of the disappeared in the former war zone have been conducting a continuous protest. Today, the International Day of the Disappeared, marks the 192nd day that they have sat in the road, demanding answers about the fate of their loved ones.

When I met some of the protesters in July, they expressed very little hope that Sri Lanka would ever deliver transitional justice. Many described having given details about their missing children to countless government bodies. But in eight years of asking for information, they said, not a single missing person has been found. They were incredulous that the international community would trust an accountability process to those with blood on their hands, pointing to the harassment they face from the security forces as evidence that the government’s promises are not sincere. In fact, family members of the disappeared recounted receiving phone calls from the intelligence services while on their way to a highly publicized meeting with Sri Lanka’s president in June. Just last week, one of these women was assaulted and threatened by two men who told her to abandon the protest campaign.

If domestic accountability for war crimes seems unlikely, so do international criminal trials. Sri Lanka is not a member of the International Criminal Court and is an unlikely candidate for the creation of an ad hoc international tribunal. That’s where cases like the one activists are trying to launch in Brazil (and in the other countries where Jayasuriya holds an ambassadorial post) come in.

Although domestic courts generally only have jurisdiction over crimes that occur on national territory, many countries assert universal jurisdiction over serious violations of international law.
Brazil’s legal code allows its courts to try anyone present on its territory for crimes that Brazil has treaty obligations to punish, like genocide or torture. Of course, as an ambassador, Jayasuriya has diplomatic immunity. To pursue criminal charges, Brazil would have to ask Sri Lanka to waive his immunity, something the Sri Lanka government is extremely unlikely to do. This fact makes Jayasuriya’s unceremonious departure a puzzling choice. Ambassadors lose their immunity when they step down. If one of the Latin American countries decides to proceed with an investigation, he could then become subject to an international arrest warrant. At that point, he would have to avoid the territory of any country whose government would be willing to arrest and extradite him.

If Jayasuriya’s worst-case scenario is that he has to exercise some caution in his vacation planning, what is the value of attempting to launch a universal jurisdiction prosecution against him? It’s true that the effect on him is negligible, especially when weighed against the gravity of the crimes of which he is accused. But stronger effects may be felt elsewhere.

For the Sri Lankan government, exceedingly conscious of its international reputation, the embarrassment of this episode may prompt a rethink of its long-standing habit of rewarding its “war heroes” with plush diplomatic posts. It may also prompt progress on domestic transitional justice. As my research shows, this is unlikely to mean prosecutions. But it could shake loose some information about the fate of the missing, or movement toward the creation of a truth commission.

For the broader international audience, it’s a signal that war criminals don’t get to be honored members of the community. And for the victims, it’s a slim ray of hope that the perpetrators of atrocities against them can’t hide from justice forever.

Kate Cronin-Furman is a postdoctoral research fellow in the International Security Program at the Harvard Kennedy School’s Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs.

On Wijeyadasa’s AG’s Department & Marapana’s War Crimes Inquiry



P. Soma Palan
I refer to the statements by two Ministers, both legal minds, the Minister of Justice, Mr. Wijeyadasa Rajapakshe and the new Minister of Foreign Affairs, Mr. Tilak Marapana, in the Daily Mirror of 19th August on (a) the Independence of the Attorney General’s Department and (b) International Inquiry into alleged War Crimes, respectively.
AG’s Department
Minister Rajapakshe states that- I quote “the Judiciary and the AG’s Department act as independent institutions today and are free to act on the Police Reports given to it”. Does the Independence of an Institution means the freedom not to act also? It should, of course, have the freedom how to act. The Executive, no doubt, cannot interfere in this. But can it wait without acting? If Police Reports are given, it has to act on them. There is no freedom for inaction. If it finds no cause to take action on Reports given to it, then it must specifically and unequivocally say that the cases submitted to it have no prima-facie case to act upon, rather than procrastinate and “sleep on them”. Cannot the Minister concerned take the AG’s Department to task and instruct it to expedite action. This does not amount to political interference. This is sound management of the Department under your purview .Independence and non-interference does not mean tolerance or acceptance of inefficiency. Does it? Interference means influencing a course of action one politically desires. It is a question of either framing indictments for Inquiry by the Court or, state that there is no basis for charging the offenders. One of the two must be done. Otherwise, it is neglect of one’s duty. As a Minister in charge of the AG’s Department, he cannot wash his hands off, of Administrative control over it. The real reason is, the AG’s Department is not acting independently and objectively, but influenced by other external actors. The AG’s Department was a highly politicized one under the previous regime; it was directly under the Executive President. Although the previous regime is no more, relics of it are still extant. That is the crux of the matter. People demand justice, but it is denied to them.
International Inquiry into alleged War Crimes
The Minister of Foreign Affairs, Mr. Tilak Marapana says that- I quote “we have told them that foreign Judges and Lawyers may attend any domestic probe as Observers and this happened in the past as well.”He fails to distinguish and differentiate between the past context and the present context. This shows a lack discriminating reasoning. Or, he is mindful of this, but wants to mislead.  He cites in support of a case where the M.P. Mr. Jayalath Jayawadena made a complaint to the IPU for the violation of his parliamentary privilege. He says that the IPU sent an Indian Judge as an ‘Observer’ to the Judicial Inquiry. There is a substantive difference between an Inquiry into breach of parliamentary privilege and an Inquiry into the violation of International Law and International Humanitarian Law on a Resolution of the UNHRC, which is an arm of the United Nations. One cannot equate both Inquiries on the same footing. IPU is an association of Countries adopting a Parliamentary Democracy, whereas UNHRC is a world body which is mandated with jurisdictional power to inquire into violations of Human Rights and Humanitarian Laws. Sri Lanka as a Member State has to uphold its obligations. Alleged War Crimes are exceedingly serious than a mere violation of parliamentary privileges, where a Foreign Judge as an ‘Observer’ would suffice, at a domestic Inquiry. Other false reasoning of the Minister is when he states that “ what is more important is that the International Community and agencies are of the view the Sri Lankan Government is safeguarding Human Rights, and there is Judicial freedom, media freedom, freedom of expression and freedom of assembly”.

Read More

The legal system in Sri Lanka Good governance and the state of legal education



2017-08-31

By Sarath Wijesinghe (Solicitor/Attorney-At- Law and former Ambassador to UAE and Israel)

Legal system in Sri Lanka is complicated and controversial with a mixture of English Law, Property Law based on Roman-Dutch Law in addition to Kandyan, Tamil and Muslim personal laws. Areas on Business and Commerce are governed by the English and western jurisprudence and International Law is based on the principles of the Convention of United Nations and International Organizations.

International Arbitrations, WTO and International Trade Agreements have entered the realm of jurisprudence with contested international trade disputes of multinational companies and local traders including the State. The situation has become complicated after the change of power structure and the legal system on independence from British colonial powers from 4 February 1948 when power was transferred to the indigenous but western oriented rulers by the Order in Council. The Law College was established in 1874 and the University College continued academic legal education and Courts were established under the Soulbury Constitution for the delivery of justice unchanged, headed by the Queen of Great Britain. English dominates in the legal field despite all three languages, Sinhala and Tamil being used as official Court languages with English as a link language to communicate with the international legal community and the world in general.

The judicial system and independence of the Judiciary

Changes made by the 1972 and 1978 Constitutions are in the public domain and known to the people. Under the 1978 Constitution which is in force today, judicial power of the people is exercised by Parliament through Courts, tribunals and institutions established under laws guaranteeing the independence of the Courts and the Judiciary, respecting and recognizing the principles of separation of powers placed in compartments. With the Constitution as the source, all other legislature-made laws have set up the Court structure with the Supreme Court as the Apex Court with enormous powers and to manage and control the legal education through the Law College as the institutions to permit the legal profession to act as officers of the Court system to assist Courts. Those who have graduated from the Universities in Sri Lanka and worldwide are obliged to qualify themselves at the Law College as Attorneys-at-Law to be eligible to perform duties of officers in a Court of Law and private practice. In the UK and western jurisprudence the lawyers serve in many capacities in addition to engaging in active practice whereas in Sri Lanka the tendency of professionals is to engage mostly in practice in Courts as the centre.

UN Guidelines and Dhammapada

According to UN guidelines and accepted norms the Judiciary should be kept away and insulated from other branches maintaining freedom of appointments, promotions and transfers which include the Attorney General – the Chief Adviser to the State as an independent entity. Now that the former Justice Minister Wijeyadasa Rajapakshe has become a casualty as a result of refusing to influence the Attorney General to set up special Courts to function on a daily basis and the sudden meeting of the AG with the Prime Minister raises eyebrows in the Legal profession and among concerned citizens. There were talks of 'trephine Justice' during the last regime – especially under the leadership of the most controversial Chief Justice Sarath Silva who was responsible for degrading the integrity of the Judiciary. Today Hulftsdorp gossip echoes are heard about 'telephone justice' being rampant even more than before and may be worse when the inexperienced new Minister of Justice has been armed with the mandate to direct intervention over the AG and the other institutions of justice and peace. The quote from the 'Dhammapada' to wit, that it's not by passing arbitrary judgments that a man becomes wise but that the judgment should be given according to the truth. This applies all the time to any society and it would appear to be most relevant in this era of the law's delays, incompetence, Bribery and Corruption.

Currently 10% of the population are litigants complaining of the law's delays, injustice, corruption, and shortcomings in the delivery of justice, which has become a main issue in the legal system facing criticism by the public on a daily basis. Backlogs and delays in concluding cases are high, with the citizens attempting to take the law into their hands due to excessive delays with 95,000 unresolved cases and a backlog of 800,000 cases pending including the controversial 105 cases, which demand that the Attorney General's Department puts on the fast track to be heard on a daily basis by special Courts, established most probably outside the Constitution, akin to the steps taken to deal with Mrs. Bandaranaike the main contender of J.R. Jayewardene who won the Presidential Election easily in her absence. It seems that history is repeating itself by prioritizing special fast-track cases targeting political opponents. Some partition and land cases take over 30 years with rape and murder cases taking around 20 years for conclusion, with witnesses and productions lost and Police officers are dead or retired. Twelve-year-old rape victims are fated to wait until they are adults of marriageable age for their cases to be finalized. This phenomenon obtains in jurisdictions such as the UK with a backlog of 63,000 cases of immigration appeals, and India with a backlog of hundreds of thousands of criminal and civil cases also begging solutions. Therefore, the law's delays are due to the weaknesses of ineffective systems and not due to incompetence of the AG, Judiciary, or the legal profession.

Bribery and corruption are rampant

Bribery and corruption are rampant despite pledges, announcements and pronouncements by the leaders of Good Governance, who got rid of Mrs. Dilrukshi Wickremasinghe – the former Chair of the Bribery Commission and – Lacille de Silva the former Secretary to the Commission who were appointed to fight corruption. They are good officers who were compelled to vacate leaving a vacuum in which bribery and underworld characters were free to run amok. Most corrupt State officers and institutions in the good governance machinery are the officers of the Courts, Motor Traffic,

Immigration, Customs, and Finance and Trade related establishments carrying on the business of corruption with no interference from the good governance machinery that consists of 15% of the population as government servants. Deputy Minister Ranjan Ramanayaka is in hot water with the erroneous statement that most Judges and Lawyers are corrupt. This has been challenged by the BASL, which is planning to file papers on contempt of Court. Ramanayaka has forgotten that we have the most corrupt 'Parliament Mafia' working together shedding party politics and other differences to earn money at any cost by selling vehicle permits (including him) accounting for a loss of Rs 3.1 billion to the citizen and more to be exposed. The unprecedented and unusual meeting of the Attorney General with the Prime Minister at Temple Trees has resulted in accelerating prosecution of selected political cases against one family and clan on political grounds. This is a matter of concern to the average citizen.

Ignorance of law is no excuse (Ignoratia excusa – famous Latin phrase) is accepted and followed in Sri Lankan jurisprudence where a person unaware of law may not escape liability merely because one was unaware of law whereby the citizen is presumed to know the law and procedure of the land. It is due to this practice that the State should take steps to educate the citizen in basic knowledge of the law and procedures from school to adulthood and to ensure that the legal profession is equipped adequately to assist litigants and the Courts. The legal profession has been an honourable profession. During the days of the Roman Empire the lawyers represented and assisted the litigants as a voluntary service. The cloak that lawyers wear over their clothes was meant for litigants to drop whatever they could afford as the lawyer's fee in either pocket of the cloak. The members of the legal profession should be honourable and knowledgeable in law and legal procedure.

Legal education and professionalism are developed to meet this requirement of high calibre lawyers by all litigants. Then there is an issue whether the lawyers are honest and honourable and also knowledgeable and conversant in the law and procedures. This is a doubtful issue and it is the citizen who is capable of answering this question.

Legal Education - Improve the quality, discipline and honesty of major players

Majority of law books, decisions, and judgments are in English. Most of the present generation of lawyers are not conversant with the law and its procedures. This is a worrying factor in the sphere of legal education and law practice. In the United Kingdom the legal profession is disciplined and rigorous punishments are handed down for unprofessionalism, dishonesty, inefficiency and misdirecting clients. In the

United Kingdom Solicitor Dijit Bechada, 45, was found guilty of fraud and obstructing the course of justice and jailed after inquiry by the Solicitor's disciplinary tribunal after the matter was reported to courts. This sort of thing is not heard of in Sri Lanka. UK has a developed free legal system supported by law centres and citizen advice bureaus which are not found in Sri Lanka. Sri Lanka Law College has not improved in step with the current needs and challenges and still the out-dated methods are followed without taking the current needs of the citizen into consideration. The Sri Lanka Law College is managed by the Council of Legal Education headed by the Chief Justice following the old traditions without taking the modern challenges and needs into consideration. Therefore revolutionary changes are required to educate the profession and the citizen to equip them with knowledge by making the complicated legal system simple and accessible to the common man by encouraging and assisting the students and the legal profession on enhancing the knowledge of the English language and the subject matter, with the assistance of the dormant and ineffective Law Commission with the vision to promote the reforms of the law to promote and implement good governance that is asleep and inactive and full of bribery and corruption. None of the institutions appear to be active and vibrant. The Law College is fortunate to be managed by an able head – but he is only an employee with no powers to change the system which is in the hands of the main management team.

Way forward towards Good, Governance and Rule of Law

Collective attempts of the law College, Bar Association, Faculties of Universities, Legal Aid Commission, and non-governmental organizations with the court network and the State departments should be mobilized with a vision to assist the citizen to regain his lost confidence in the effectiveness of the law and thereby to prevent taking the law into their hands for justice when justice and fair play are not forthcoming from the justice system. The process of decision making and process by which decisions are made and implemented should be independent, participatory, with consensus based, responsive, efficient, equitable and inclusive. These are the main features of principles of good governance akin to principles of " Lichchive Kings" who historically took collective decisions and dispersed peacefully according to the proponents of good governance. Do the rulers who are appointed by the people as trustees of the nation for a specified period, live up to the expectations and principles of good governance? This is the million dollar question capable of being answered only by the people at the receiving end who are supposed to be powerful on paper.
(Writer claims responsibility for the contents of the article and could be contacted on sarath7@hotmail.co.uk)

Remarkable journey towards democracy - Dr. Vickramabahu

Remarkable journey towards democracy - Dr. Vickramabahu

Aug 31, 2017

All media accepted the importance of the Sathyagrha launched by the Sixty two movement and gave the due publicity. Most emphasized the speech made by Rajitha, the radical minister for health, in defending the ability of the government to breakaway from forces that want to bargain with fascism and secretly plan to deal with the crimes committed by the previous regime.

He emphasized that a special Court will be set up to investigate corruption that occurred during the previous regime. Health Minister Rajitha Senaratne speaking further said that people who oppose and want to protect Mahinda clan will be dealt with. He was welcomed by the “Movement for the Protection of Convention among the 6.2 million people" or shortly Sixty two movement. To the cheering crowd he said that the Cabinet had initiated discussions on setting up of a Special Court, immediately to conclude the corruption cases against politicians and officials of the previous regime. He further said, that the President had agreed to conduct a Referendum to pass the proposed Constitution. Speaking on former Foreign Minister Ravi Karunanayake resignation he said that, Mr. Karunanayake had resigned with pride and it was the beginning of a change in the country. He admitted “The period starting with this month would be a crucial time for the government and there will be certain important changes in the country.”

Yahapalana Government completed a period of two and half years. But as the Government passed its two-year mark a question of credibility has raised in the mind of the general public against the Government. Present Yahapalana leaders had overthrown the previous regime by making certain election promises to the people. As the election manifesto of the Government had promised, they were to enforce the law strictly and follow policies of good governance. Those found to be corrupt in the previous regime were to be punished. The present Government leaders earlier stated that they wouldn’t allow anyone to corrupt law and order by using political powers. Also they promised to solve the national problem by devolving power; executive presidency will be eliminated. 
Though its third year, people pose the question whether the promises mentioned in their election manifesto, were only a rhetoric, or not?
During recent ‘sathyagrha’ titled ‘Heta Delakshaya Seeruwen’ staged in front of the Viharamahadevi Park, several Political leaders from the ‘Yahapalana Government’, activists and civil society organizations voiced their views influencing the authorities to fulfill the election manifesto which they had provided during the last presidential election. The ‘sathyagrha’ was organized by the “Movement for the Protection of Convention among 6.2 million people” in collaboration with many civil society organizations who had assisted the’ Yahapalana concept’ to form a Government. The sathyagrha was able to break the view that Yahapalanaya is following the path of Mahinda regime. Such desperate people pointed the finger at finger at Wijedasa and his followers and said, “The reason that they have come to that open action, relatively recently and did not proceed down that track shortly after assuming their seats of power was probably because they had to establish themselves in the various positions that gave them the opportunity to conduct matters of governance as they saw fit with the single constraint of ensuring that they maximized the pecuniary benefits from whatever they did.” That six important ministers were attracted by the people’s action shows that the social political content of the Yahapalanaya is different from the fascistic politics of Mahinda regime.

The Rajapaksa regime displayed an absolute disregard with regard to the rule of law, fairness, basic justice and the rest of the cornerstones of a democratic society. One could, literally, get away with murder if she had the right connections. Sometimes it was by the devious expedient of being packed off to Singapore with a bullet in the brain allegedly leaving the victim a human vegetable only to return, miraculously recovered and ready for battle, literally and figuratively. That era is gone, for ever.

‘Sixty two group’ organized the sathyagrha while people were suspiciously looking at clouds of corruption that appeared again. People assumed two years back, those dark clouds of corruption and brutal crimes have drifted with the defeat of the Rajapaksa fascistic government. Now they are suspicious. Are they descending again and are any successors of Mahinda regime fill the vacancy. They were wondering with not only a sense of disgust but one of bitter dejection. ‘Sixty two group’ with a successful sathyagrha could challenge the resignation and pessimisms. Obviously, resorting to the old fall-back of resignation is hardly a response deserving of acceptance given the plight of Lankan nation and what it can and will mean to all of us in all communities ; Sinhala, Tamil and Muslim. One could go further, Buddhist Christians, Hindus, Muslims and other religious groups too should be devoted to make use of the opportunity given by January 8 democratic uprising.

If one takes a step back and try to project a perspective on the current plight of Lanka, the sense of quiet euphoria that seemed to sweep across the nation with the defeat of the most corrupt and violent fascistic government is only a beginning; there was a massive table of barbarians that left behind that should have been cleared. It has been a very misfortune to see that huge but temporary uprising have lulled many of us into a false sense of complacency in the matter of the return of fascism; more correctly reorganized Mahinda group behind the power of Yahapalanaya. But now there is no excuse for any of us who participated in the Laksa sixty two uprising and perhaps experienced that optimism to pretend that it was a simple matter of false pretences. No, it was real and precisely because of that we can and must do all we could to turn back that garbage-bearing rising tide of Mahinda group.

This kind of situation is not without history. The current predicament is not without precedent in even in many of the western democracies, the difference being that there were proletarian political alternatives as in the Russian revolution. Liberal capitalist leaders deluded into believing that they could practice this liberal philosophy as they wish, without let or hindrance. But they were soon brought down to earth by the democratic proletarian power groups who organized mass campaigns. It is wrong to assume that a similar option does not exist for us now, because the current “alternative” consists of the very lot that we thought we were rid of a couple of years ago, the Mahinda group! What makes it an absolute necessity that we change the present status quo is the fact that certain set of racist thieves and political bandits hidden behind Ranil and Maithree are beginning to form the illusion that if they combine that sense of absolute right to whatever they wish for, with the impunity of them and their cohorts being above the law; nothing and nobody can touch them or stop them.

The sathyagrha was a success and showed every body that social and political awareness of the people who brought this government to power is high and they are prepared fight back to put the Yahapalanaya on to the correct track. It also proved that the power of democracy is not over or receding. On the other hand it sent the message to fascistic Mahinda group and the Polpot SAITM camp that with a short and simple notice near 3000, three thousand people tuned up to face any kind of challenge. These were wise women/men or militants from town and country, each representing at least one hundred 100, in the respective town or the village. Among them many were trade union leaders. Also the female participation was very prominent. It was a very conscious participation, make no mistake.
- http://epaper.dailynews.lk

If you can’t COPE, quit

Friday, 1 September 2017 

logoI’m turning the page today. Which is to say: I’m trashing ‘realpolitik’ – which was rubbish in the main anyway – and throwing down the gauntlet.

Time to get real… in ‘politics’ – government, journalists, the whole jing-bang – as they say.

Sorry if you’ve been at your wit’s end, as much as I have. Over the shortcomings of good government, as much as critical engagement by civil society. Expecting a new political culture to emerge from a milieu where ‘the usual suspects’ occupied the House – as always – but simply sat in a slightly different configuration was – and is – unrealistic. Not that the closet we call a Cabinet is bursting at the seams with fresh blood and clean new thinking either (with some exceptions perhaps). Do you think, courteous peruser of this newspaper in pursuit of a quick fix in politics and a pithy sharp column to capture its spirit, that we’ve been undiscerning – and duped? I’ll take just one example of procedural delays today.

Not to illustrate that there are legislative “law’s delays”. Or that “the law is an ass” as far as many lawmakers are concerned. But to point out that far too many lawbreakers than is at all good for a functioning democracy rest in the ranks of the Legislature itself. And it seems that the very Parliamentary oversight mechanism which is tasked with investigating and rooting out corruption – wherever it may find it in public enterprises – is bursting at the seams with its findings. While the State departments tasked with acting on the findings as regards waste, mismanagement, bureaucracy, or worse, is hamstrung by a lack of political will. Well that is exactly what we thought this administration had – the political will – to critically engage corruption. However it’s looking increasingly like it has exactly the opposite – a politically motivated won’t – for the old familiar reasons.

There has been a veritable barrelful of excuses as to why COPE can’t cope. These have ranged from the abundance of cases covering virtually every ministry to the alleged political motivation (or lack of it) in the AG’s Dept. Those who barter these excuses for lack of concrete action being taken against the miscreants appear to have simply bought themselves and their cabals more time.

Time, maybe more than money, is a precious commodity for corrupt mandarins who are in it to serve themselves and their political masters. There are also other benefits which accrue by virtue of not prosecuting senior bureaucrats and belligerent service chiefs among other bothersome scoundrels indictable by dint of COPE’s findings. These range from securing the Government’s majority and thereby the coalition’s shelf life to returning favours to one’s fellow rogues. Who hunt with other hounds while in government and run with the hare while in opposition. Those excuses reasons justifications just underline the undeniable fact that we suffer not from the lack of a new political culture. But the abysmal continuity of the old political culture under another description and dispensation.

Just take the test below – set for you and I and other civic-minded civilians including Cabinet ministers and costermonger MPs – to run a reality check on how our democracy can’t COPE… And if so, how – and why – Government must quit… And you and I can stop grumbling. And getting the governance we risked life and limb for.

Mid Term Paper

A.    Essays.

1.“History is not what happened. It is what you can remember.” Explore with relation to the Coalition Government’s campaign-trail promise to engage with and eliminate corruption. (For e.g. Why do we not remember any of all that now? Do you think they meant it? Even if not, could or should we not hold them to a mandate given in good faith? Can you remember anything except the cost of living and other encumbrances?)

B.     Short Answers.

1. Briefly admit that COPE is superfluous at present. And is not so much a gift as an addition to an embarrassment of riches that have a ‘C’ in them somewhere – CID, CIABOC, CCU, etc. – when it comes to combating the big-C crime: Corruption. (Hint: say, “YES” – full marks for your confession!)

2.    Reassure the general public that the AG’s Dept. is not biased, partisan, or partial in any way by presenting your favourite loyalist’s file to them on a platter. (A simple “YES, I WILL DO SO.’ will suffice. Half-marks if you hesitate, mid-sentence?)

C.     MCQ.

1.COPE will pursue Justice in theory – but not put actual villains, once discovered, behind bars because:

a.Politics is the art of the possible – and how to do politics if artifice is not?

b.Justice delayed is Justice denied.

c.Everyone in the House is a villain in one way or another.

d.All of the above.

2.The Committee to Offer Procedural Excuses in bringing brigands to book…

a.COPE…

b.I can’t COPE!

c.Who can COPE?

d.A ‘COPE ê kadé’ could do better.

3.The only MP I’d trust to do justice on COPE is:

a.RW or WR.

b. WW or MR.

c. EW.

d.Eww… None of the Above (N/A = Not Able/Not Applicable).

The acid test is not just for Government, or those who play politics with it – such as craven academics/professionals or cowardly civil society. It is for the panoply of ordinary people – like you and I – who pay our elected representatives more than the courtesy of electing them to govern in our stead and on our behalf.

That plethora of ills which bedevil Parliament – lack of knowledge, skills, commitment; too much self-interest and little or no selflessness in service – have too long been lamented over. With precious little being done by way of realistic reforms to rectify the sickly syndrome of lawless legislators.

Those brazenly corrupt or corpulently bureaucratic members of the Judiciary have been left alone too long for fear or legal reprisals for us to pass the opportunity – through the JSC perhaps – to subject them post-haste to a jury of their peers. Those bureaucratic bunglers – or worse – in State departments appear to have been given a new lease of life in the absence of the National Audit Bill being debated.

There may never come a time when CJs, JPs, MPs, PMs, are told by the public to “go and put a jump” in to the lake. However it is worth exploring what reforms public engagement – and public interest litigation – with these two branches of government (Judiciary and Legislature) can be brought about. With renewed interest in public litigation against crooked or corrupt governors and the ramifications of their substandard performance paid for by taxpayers.

There is – last but by no means least – the matter of coping with the extent of corruption that has been brought to Parliament’s (and the public’s) attention by and through COPE. The sheer scope of the exposés is sufficient to bring a guilty blush to most parliamentarians’ faces and prompt them to slink away in shame before the public’s displeasure. That they won’t – and that the executive, which governs the process doesn’t dare to, because it can’t risk shooting its generals – is enough to bring a flush of furious rage to your countenance and mine.

Is fury enough? Do we let it fizzle out in the folly of our cocktail circuits and in the futility of our coffee klatsches? Or must we beg – plead – threaten – importune – sue – Government to do something about it? Or go? If yes, good! If no, not so good… but why not? The acid test is for us, too. We must put our money where our mouth is. Else, we are no better than the buffoons who put their mouth (plans, policies, programmes) where their money (precepts, practices) dare not go.

(A senior journalist, the writer was once Chief Sub of The Sunday Leader, 1994-8, and is ex- LMD: Editor, 2004-8. He has made a career out of asking questions and not waiting for answers.)

Liberalism: Getting out while you can

Get Out’ is a parody where one is left wondering as to what  the director actually intended  
  • Get Out is a parody of Guess Who’s Coming to Dinner, the first American movie to depict interracial marriage
  • In the sixties when Poitier got star role after star role playing protagonists
2017-09-01
In Jordan Peele’s intriguing film ‘Get Out’, a White American family lures Black Americans to their house to operate on and then (literally) insert into them the brains of old, disabled White Americans to guarantee immortality for the latter. What gets kicked out, of course, are the brains of the Black Americans (who needs to keep them once they’re no longer of use, anyway?). “Perfect metaphor,” I thought to myself, reflecting on the many instances in history when Black Westerners in general were contorted to become hosts for White Westerners. Incidentally I am not just talking about slavery, outdated or contemporary. I am talking also about liberalism.   
Historically speaking “oppressed” and “inferior” races have culturally and scientifically been debased in both scholarship and popular culture
I am no American and not being one doesn’t and won’t give me carte blanche to write at length about American history, the Ku Klux Klan, the Founding Fathers, or Donald Trump. The history of an ideology, in any case, is far more interesting to me than the history of an individual country. Liberalism was not born in the United States. The simple truth is the other way around: the United States was born out of liberalism. Now that the Civil War has entered the mainstream political discourse in that country again, perhaps it would do to explore how that ideology more, delving into how the intellectual and the artist have perpetuated prejudicial views of the Black Westerner so much that he’s become a target for the liberal left and the right.   
The fundamental rationale for dissecting those aforementioned races, whether in Asia, the Middle-East, or Africa, was to conquer them and to exert some semblance of ultimate authority over them
Historically speaking “oppressed” and “inferior” races have culturally and scientifically been debased in both scholarship and popular culture. That is why Edward Said’s Orientalism is as important a “text” as Griffith’s The Birth of a Nation. Said’s monumental book is and continues to be relevant at a time when the West still tends to look at the East through its preconceived notions of the latter, academically or otherwise. The fundamental rationale for dissecting those aforementioned races, whether in Asia, the Middle-East, or Africa, was to conquer them, to exert some semblance of ultimate authority over them (Oriental studies being just one example, incidentally). Judging the degraded, inferior race on yardsticks created by the White Man was of course a corollary to this: the East didn’t ask for it, but in the absence of a yardstick the White West found itself to be best equipped. The choice was unilateral.   

Over time these yardsticks proved to be valid and important for slave traders, slave owners, and imperialists. The minstrel show was an example of this process occurring the other way around: the White West was judging the East (because Africa, from where slaves were forcibly extracted, belongs to the East) on what the former considered to be latter’s own terms: gullible, inchoate, and incoherent. The same could be said of the Empire (British, French, German etc). There was a gap between the colonial bureaucrat and the people he was commissioned (or rather destined) to serve, a gap that proved to be so wide that when the British, French, and German (as well as other empire-beholden countries) marched across their colonies they didn’t look at their subjects, but made those subjects the aim of their scholarship. It was a way of profiling them as inferior without beating the tom-tom about it.
There was a gap between the colonial bureaucrat and the people he was commissioned to serve a gap that proved to be so wide that when the British, French, and German marched across their colonies they didn’t look at their subjects.
Popular culture, inasmuch as I like it and consider it as one of the elements of modernity that keep us human beings sane, I mentioned earlier as being rather ambivalent about certain pressing issues. A friend of mine called Hollywood “Hollow-wood” recently, and to a considerable extent (with some reservations) I agree, particularly when it comes to racial disparities or the inflation thereof in the conflict between the neo-fascist right and the liberal left. How else can you explain why, for instance, in the great decade of desegregation (the sixties), the American liberal filmmaker tried to justify Kennedy’s and Lyndon Johnson’s efforts at doing away with white-against-black prejudice by portraying either a) the White Man as the ultimate saviour of the coloured people, or b) the Black Man as possessing near-perfect idealisations of the White Man? Get Out is a parody (and a thrilling parody at that) of Guess Who’s Coming to Dinner, the first American movie to depict, with a considerable level of sympathy, interracial marriage. Seeing that classic again the other day, however, one is left wondering as to what the director actually intended.  
 
Consider the protagonist of GWCTD: a Negro named Dr John Prentice, played by the great Sidney Poitier. His CV is so wide that I can only offer a summary of it by Roger Ebert: “A noble, rich, intelligent, handsome, ethical medical expert who serves on United Nations committees when he’s not hurrying off to Africa, Asia, Switzerland and all those other places where his genius is required.” The perfect Negro, idealised to match the perfect liberal family (who nevertheless have certain reservations, which are eventually dispelled, about letting their daughter face an entire country seething with rage and wrath: 1967, the year the film was released, was also the year in which interracial marriage was finally legalised). In the sixties when Poitier got star role after star role playing protagonists in predominantly “whitewashed” casts, he was almost always portrayed as the perfect professional like that. “The problem with liberals is that they always idealise the Other. The problem with the racists is that they always demonise the Other. In both cases, the outcome is the same: the Negro becomes the White Man’s Negro,” another friend of mine commented, reflecting on the title of Raoul Peck’s 2016 documentary on James Baldwin, I Am Not Your Negro.
This subtle dichotomy between idealising and demonising a collective is what has coloured the race. Those who celebrate Donald Trump do so because they feel that the minorities, both foreign and local, are eating into their jobs.
This subtle dichotomy between idealising and demonising a collective is what has coloured the race debate, not just in America but in the West in general. Those who celebrate Donald Trump do so because they feel (as I mentioned last week) that the minorities, both foreign and local, are eating into their jobs. Those who oppose him, from the mainstream “liberal left”, idealise the Negro, placing him on an imaginary pedestal and considering him their equal without delving into their hopes, fears, sorrows, and joys. I mentioned To Kill a Mockingbird last week, or rather its sequel/prequel Go Set a Watchman. Well, TKAM has a problem too, one that no less a person than Ebert highlighted: “The black people in this scene are not treated as characters, but as props, and kept entirely in long shot. The close-ups are reserved for the white hero and villain.” Perhaps Get Out, a movie I’ve come to hold in such esteem that I’m sure it’ll be at least nominated for the Best Picture Oscar next year, is a more telling indictment of what the liberal left have done to the hard-done-by Negro: install their brains in his, and make themselves his heroes and ours. They are not.

Sri Lanka’s Sovereignty & Economy Confronting An Impossible Trinity



Dr. Ameer Ali
An India-U.S. geostrategic and neoliberal economic alliance on the one hand and an aspiring-to-be world power China on the other, with a financially empowered neoliberal economic manager, IMF, acting as a third form an impossible trinity that is redefining the political sovereignty and economic destiny of many smaller nations. A debt-burdened but resourceful post-war Sri Lanka with its strategic location in the Indian Ocean is a classic victim of the pressures exerted by this impossible trinity.
When the Sri Lankan army defeated the LTTE in 2009 I described that victory as comprehensive and absolute but Pyrrhic. It was pyrrhic not simply in terms of the enormous losses, both in terms of economic resources and human lives, which were immediate, but more importantly in terms of the long term damage that the war, which was totally unnecessary to start with, was going to cost to the country’s sovereignty and economic future. This may not have been obvious at that time and certainly was not a serious concern for the victors who were physically and emotionally basking in schadenfreude, but now and within less than a decade the real cost of the war is beginning to bite politically as well as economically.
The situation that Sri Lanka is facing now is somewhat analogous, although on a tiny scale, to that of the U.S. and its allies in the aftermath of their Pyrrhic victory over Afghanistan, Iraq and Libya.  Of course to them it is not a question of national sovereignty, which in any case has to be redefined in the face of globalization with porous territorial borders, but rather the problem of domestic security in their countries that has become a nightmare. The imperative demand to secure borders and local population from so called terror attacks which ceaselessly consumes huge amount of unaffordable dollars at the expense of other more vital needs of the society such as education, health care and welfare support to the vulnerable has brought home to policy makers the real magnitude of the high-priced victory. Even though the Western leaders don’t want to admit it openly, yet, the fact remains that the steeply rising security costs are threatening to jeopardise the much touted neoliberal economic model. In that sense at least one of Bin Laden’s promises to “bleed the U.S. to the point of bankruptcy” (he said this in a videotaped speech sent to Aljazeera on 1 November 2004) may be nearing partial fulfilment.
Sri Lanka’s political sovereignty and economic destiny have been virtually compromised by successive governments since the 1980s partly because of growing geopolitical pressures in the Indian Ocean and partly because of financial indebtedness to foreign lenders, both of them are closely linked to the civil war.
In spite of Sri Lankan’s military superiority acquired through costly state-of-the-art weaponry and aggressive recruitment of soldiery that war would have prolonged even further had it not been for the covert but decisive role played by India. Future historians with access to the now secret documents on the war will have more to say on the crucial Indian variable. Delhi was prepared to betray the political support of Tamil Nadu and sacrifice the lives of thousands of Sri Lankan Tamils not because Delhi loved the Sinhalese but because of India’s strategic interest in the Sri Lankan economy and her maritime waters. Similarly, China’s support during the war was also coloured by her own national interest to gain market and add one more pearl to her string of military and commercial facilities along the Indian Ocean. These hard facts are now being openly displayed in the various economic and strategic deals that are being signed between Sri Lanka and India on the one hand and Sri Lanka and China on the other. The actual outcome of these deals are more to the advantage of the foreigner than to the local.     
Economically India is slowly but surely proceeding on her long term mission to convert Sri Lanka into a profitable enclave for Indian capitalists. At the same time, geo-strategically India’s desperation to gain a long term leasehold over the Trincomalee harbour like her leasehold over Mattala airport are measures to counter the growing Chinese influence in the island. The 99-year leasehold over the Hambantota harbour granted to the Chinese government was a payback to Chinese weaponry used in the war and financial support to the island’s infrastructural development. China also has been awarded the contract to redevelop the Colombo Port city. Just as India wants to keep the Indian Ocean Indian in every sense of that name so also Beijing wants to safeguard her trade routes along a new silk road over the Indian Ocean which has now become crucially vital in the face of tensions in the Pacific between Washington and Beijing. In this new geopolitical great game Sri Lanka is bound to face situations when she will be forced to make a choice between two or even three – if one includes the U.S – confrontationists. It will be a cruel choice that will tax Sri Lanka’s diplomatic skill to its extreme. Will that also endanger her sovereignty?
The IMF, the third of the impossible trinity, is a different kettle of fish. Its sole mission is to train Sri Lanka as an obedient pupil of the neoliberal economic school. As the supreme institution of the neoliberal economic order IMF has invariably become the handmaiden of Washington and the Wall Street. If getting economic and financial assistance from India and China becomes too onerous the only other source available to Sri Lanka is the IMF, but that supremo has its own conditionality attached to its wallet. The so called structural adjustment program and austerity measures assiduously preached by the IMF ultimately benefits the rich at the expense of the poor. Broadening the tax base by shifting from direct to indirect taxes, privatization of state owned or state managed enterprises, operation of an untrammelled free market, freedom for foreign multinationals are some of IMF’s cure for national economic ailment. The recent IMF $167 million tranche to Sri Lanka carries with it some of these conditionality. The usual IMF mantra of short term pain for long term gain has not worked in any of the counties that sought IMF assistance.  If Sri Lanka refuses to play by the IMF rules, then there the international credit rating agencies that are IMF’s subsidiary managers who will punish the nation by down grading its credit rating so that other international lenders will keep away from assisting the nation. 

Read More

Is SC registrar Maheshi being a sister of SC judge Priyantha influencing decisions of judges ? Ranjan’s statement to be deliberated - CHR Sri Lanka


LEN logo(Lanka-e-News - 30.Aug.2017, 11.55PM)  The Center for  Human Rights which issued a communique  is to deliberate on  whether  the statement made by Ranjan Ramanayake that Maheshi Jayawardena (who is a sister of Priyantha Jayawardena  a Supreme court judge) by functioning as the registrar  of the Supreme court (SC)  is bringing pressure to bear on decisions of judges in regard to the cases of the powerful ,is prejudicial and whether Ranjan’s statement can in fact have that prejudicial effect.  
The Center for  Human Rights issued this notification on the 29 th,  following the attempts made to file a contempt of court case by the Bar Association of Sri Lanka  (BASL) of which the president is U .R. De Silva  over the statement made by Ranjan Ramanayake that a majority of the judges and lawyers in Sri Lanka are rogues. Interestingly U .R .De Silva  is also the lawyer for notorious Basil Rajapakse whom the former argues is not a rogue.
The full text of the communique is herein… 
Chairman of the Bar Association of Sri Lanka (BASL) UR de Silva states that they will take legal action against MP Ranjan Ramanayake in the coming week for stating that attorneys are corrupt.

In any profession there are extremely clean and professional people as well as extremely corrupt practitioners. The same applies to the judicial service and Sri Lankan citizens have the right to criticize judges and attorneys, as they have the right to be critical of any other profession. There should be the freedom to do so and those being criticized must have the discipline to tolerate criticism.

MP Ramanayake's criticism is nothing new and it has been leveled against judges and attorneys by civil society activists, journalists and these criticism have been discussed by attorneys themselves and the judicial services commission.

Former Editor of Ravaya, Mr. Victor Ivan revealed the activities of Judge Lenin Ratnayake which shocked and surprised many. The behaviour of justice Abeyratne was equally shocking. The revelations on former Chief Justice Sarath N Silva by Victor Ivan would have led to a cleanup of the judicial service is a country that possessed a civilized, democratic and transparent governance. President Maithripala Sirisena himself revealed that former chief justice Mohan Peiris told him that he is willing to give verdicts that favours the government, if he was allowed to remain in his post. CHR complained to the Judicial Services Commission about the appointment of DMI Dissanayake who received an appointment as a magistrate and after considering our appeal the Commission decided not to give him the permanent appointment. The Anti-Corruption Front lodged a complaint about the elephant theft' allegations against magistrate Thilina Gamage and the manner in which he was granted bail was controversial. Now he has been suspended. Similar allegations were levelled against district judges Somaratne and Aravinda Perera and the Commission has taken steps regarding them. The reputation of the court was also damaged due to a series of allegations, including charges of sexual harassment, against Justice Sarath de Abrew, who committed suicide.

Ravaya has revealed that there were steps to change the presiding judge over the controversial 'sil redi' case. We must discuss what affects the judiciary more, obtaining judgments after changing judges? Lawyers who attempt to change judges or the statement given by MP Ramanayake. BASL was silent about the above mentioned incidents and did not intervene to clean up the system. However civil society activists, journalists and elected representatives are keeping this debate alive and MP Ramanayake has contributed to the discussion in his capacity.

Although BASL has forgotten of this case, the most discussed topic in the judicial sector is the conflict of interest situation regarding registrar of the Supreme Court Ms. Maheshi Jayawardane.   Her brother is a Justice and there were media reports that there were attempts to influence the verdicts of cases against powerful people. This allegation tarnishes the reputation of the judiciary.

How can a statement made by a MP and an actor, known as One Shot, a Justice Seeker, be more damaging to the judiciary than any of the things mentioned above?

A responsible society does not shoot the messenger. It understands the message and takes steps to make things better. We must consider with an open mind whether the MP Ramanayake’s statement is more damaging than the opinions on Sarath N Silva and Mohan Peiris expressed by many prominent Sri Lankans. Did Ramanayake do more damage than allegations of conflict of interest faced by the Registrar of the Supreme Court?

No, it does not!

To enhance the respectability and trust on the judicial service we must drain this swamp as the former Ravaya Editor says and we iterate the importance of BASL being a part of the solution.

CHR Sri Lanka

---------------------------
by     (2017-08-31 01:36:31)