UN continues to commit knowing blunder on Eezham Tamils

[TamilNet, Thursday, 03 January 2013, 08:14 GMT]
While various publications, including an internal investigation report of the UN, find fault with the way the UN handled the Vanni War that ended in genocide, the UN, the ICRC, the IOM and other international agencies continue to commit the same blunder knowingly, by leaving Eezham Tamils entirely in the hands of Colombo, with no outfits to complain with trust or to independently monitor the on-going genocide, said a senior social activist in the island, citing the cases of the repeated rape and abuse of former LTTE cadres, the sufferings of the Tamil women coerced into SL military, the plight of a doctor who voiced for them, forced relocation of re-settlers and the acts committed on Jaffna University students. These take place at individual level, apart from the larger militarisation, colonisation and Sinhalicisation of the genocidal agenda, he said. 

The hurried withdrawal of the UN agencies and the ICRC after declaration of the closure of IDP camps, ‘completion’ of resettlement, ‘rehabilitation’ of the LTTE in the hands of genocidal Colombo – all with simulation and hoodwink– once again re-enacted what the international agencies did before and during the Vanni War to serve the vicious agenda of the Establishments of some powers, the activist in the island accused.

The treachery of the international agencies went hand in hand with the US-India tabled LLRC-based resolution at the UNHRC, the activist said.

The calculated withdrawal of international agencies, coupled together with the UNHRC resolution, has provided impunity, encouragement and international legal status for Colombo to carry out the post-war genocide agenda in an accelerated way. The individual human rights cases cited above are just manifestations, the activist observed.

Commenting on the case of Dr. Sivashankar in the detention of SL military, the activist said that the UN and the international agencies are still pathetically bankrupt in rehabilitating the doctors who served at Mu’l’livaaykkaal, in bringing them back to openly tell the truth to the world. 

Dr. Sivathasan’s words in Tamil, seemingly absolving the SL military but ending that “this is what he tells while working in Vanni” have to be carefully perused to understand in between the lines, the activist said, adding that the ultimate culprits are those who deny the rights of Eezham Tamils to directly take their complains to international agencies and be monitored internationally, independently and trustfully.

Meanwhile, some human rights activists in the diaspora told TamilNet that some countries in Europe risk even their own reputation in shielding Sri Lanka’s genocidal military, by preventing evidences of repeated rape committed on former LTTE cadres reaching the outside world. 

These European countries ignore even the recent UNHCR recommendations in recognizing serious cases of asylum seekers, the human rights activists further said.

Russian Nuclear Power Team to Arrive in Sri Lanka This Month

Tue, Jan 1, 2013,
Jan 01, Colombo: A team of Russian nuclear scientists will arrive in Sri Lanka this month to study the country's energy sector outlook, the government said today.
Russia has offered to enhance its support to Sri Lanka in many fields including trade, energy, economic and socials sectors and the visit by the Russian nuclear power team is to extend their support to Sri Lanka's power and energy sector.
The new Russian Ambassador in Colombo Alexander A. Karchava has extended Russia's assistance to Sri Lanka when he called on the Minister of Industry and Commerce Rishad Bathiyutheen, in Colombo last month.
Karchava has noted that the bilateral cooperation between the two countries has been growing "from strength to strength" since the establishment of diplomatic relations in 1957 and the bilateral trade between the two countries topped $ 360 million in2011, an increase of 34% in comparison to 2010.
However, the Ambassador has underscored the need to increase the trade volume further as it has not reached the full potential.
"However, despite this trade volume, we believe there is yet unrealized trade potentials between the two countries which we can synergize jointly," the Russian Ambassador has said.
Minister Bathiyutheen noting that almost 89% of Sri Lanka's exports to Russia is the Pure Ceylon Tea, has pointed out the need to diversify the trade.
The Russian diplomat has also expressed interest in the proposed Trincomalee Port and Industrial Zone Development project.
Karchava has noted that there is a strong presence of Sri Lankans in many top Russian education institutions while almost 21,000 Russian tourists visited Sri Lanka this year and suggested to strengthen people to people exchanges.

UN's Syria Study Contractor Benetech Has "Anonymous" Funder, State Dept Funds Affiliate

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, January 2 -- How many people have been killed in Syria? The day after New Years the UN Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights said the figure has reached 60,000. 

  A major UK newspaper -- The Independent -- said these were "UN figures."

  Then at the US State Department's briefing, spokesperson Victoria Nuland said, "we've seen this report by UN Rights Commissioner Navi Pillay."

  Not so fast. The number is from an outside contractor chosen and presumably paid by the OHCHR, Benetech. 

  As Inner City Press reported earlier in the day, onBenetech's website, following the only link for "Human Rights," there are eight funders listed, including the National Endowment for Democracy and, yes, the US Department of State.

  Inner City Press immediately asked Pillay's spokesperson Rupert Colville to "please describe when and how it was decided to commission this study, how much was paid, and how the selection / procurement process settled on Benetech.

 "And please comment on the idea that choosing a firm which lists the US State Department and the National Endowment for Democracy among its eight funders might call into question its impartiality or objectivity."

  One would think the UN's Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights would answer this question, would wantto address this question. But eight hours later, no response had been received.

  Inner City Press asked Benetech, "how was Benetech selected to do this work? When? Was there a Request for Proposals? What other work has Benetech done for the UN system in the past? Are the eight funders listed Benetech's only eight funder? Eight largest funders? 

 "Were these all grants, or payment for work done? Separately, and if you can say, is Benetech currently at work on any comparable study, whether for example about the DR Congo, Sri Lanka, Libya, Colombia, etc?"

The question was referred around within Benetech and finally this answer arrived, from Patrick Ball of Benetech:

Subject: Inner City Press questions
From: Patrick Ball [at] benetech.org
Date: Wed, Jan 2, 2013 at 6:26 PM
To: Matthew Russell Lee [at] innercitypress.com
Cc: Megan Price [at] benetech.org, Ann Harrison [at] benetech.org

Hello Matthew, to your questions:

-- The Human Rights Data Analysis Group (HRDAG) is the part of Benetech that did this report. HRDAG's donors are the Sigrid Rausing Trust, the Oak Foundation, an anonymous private foundation, and the Open Society Foundations.

-- There are a number of smaller HRDAG projects that get project-specific funding, for example our work with the Historical Archive of the National Police in Guatemala is supported by the National Endowment for Democracy.

-- None of HRDAG's (or Benetech's) donors knew of this project (except OHCHR) knew of this project until today. It has been strictly embargoed.

-- Other parts of Benetech receive funding from many other places, including the Skoll Foundation and the Omidyar Network; the Department of Education supports the Bookshare project; the MacArthur Foundation, the Department of State, and Radio Free Asia support the Martus project.

-- Yes, there was an RFP for this project. For the specific selection mechanism, you should contact OHCHR who can provide the details.

-- We have worked for the UN system as individual consultants (via UNDP) in several capacities. I spent most of 2010 designing new information systems for the MONUSCO mission in the DRC, for example.

-- Perhaps more relevantly, we've provided software and statistical support -- at no cost, I want to point out -- to a number of UN-sponsored truth commissions, most importantly, the Commission for Historical Clarification in Guatemala, and to UN criminal tribunals, including the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia.

-- Over the last 13 years, we've done analysis like this for projects in Guatemala, Peru, Kosovo, Colombia, and Timor-Leste... There are a few ongoing projects, but they're confidential until we release them.

  The detailed answer is appreciated. Ball states that "Yes, there was an RFP for this project. For the specific selection mechanism, you should contact OHCHR who can provide the details." 

  But in the eight hours since OHCHR was asked, on the morning they released "their" report, no answer has been provided.

   Is the "Data Analysis Group" really so separate that the US State Department / Radio Free Asia funding is not relevant? Given the issues at stake here, what of OHCHR's contractor being funded by an " anonymous private foundation"?

   And, rather than Benetech, isn't it the OHCHR and the UN which should be answering these questions? Watch this site.

Customs Director arrested on bribery charges

THURSDAY, 03 JANUARY 2013 

The Commission to investigate Bribery or Corruption said today it had arrested a Customs Director who heads the Preventive Division on charges for allegedly accepting a bribe of Rs.1 million to issue a certificate for the release of a container carrying spare parts.

Bribery Commission Director General Lakshmi Jayawickarama said it had been revealed that initially the customs officer had asked for Rs.5 million from a vehicle spare parts importer at Ibankatuwa in Negombo but this was later reduced to Rs.2 million.

“The Customs Director was arrested while in the act of accepting a part of the bribe,” she said.

Two teams were deployed to arrest the customs officer. (Supun Dias and Sanath Desmond)

Why was Customs chief transferred ? Chamal & Mahinda Rajapakse’s illicit arrack business leaks out

(Lanka-e-News-03.Jan.2013, 3.55AM The SL Director General of Customs , Dr. Neville Gunawardena had been suddenly removed from his post on 2nd Dec. and transferred to the Finance Ministry where he is given a post that is sans important tasks because he had been an obstacle to the illicit arrack businesses of the Rajapakse family, according to reports reaching Lanka e news. It is a cruel irony that though the Rajapakses are ostensibly promoting and propagating ‘Mathata thitha’ program to show to the country and the world that they are against liquor consumption , and are twice a month paying homage to Sri Maha Bodhi and hitting their empty heads there as a ritual , they in fact are the leading illicit arrack business magnates in the country. It is Lakshman Vasantha Perera from Matale who is running this business on behalf of the Rajapakses. There is a hidden director in the Lakshman Vasantha’s Co. The name as registered is Leksika Peiris. Her present name is Leksika Rajapakse. She is none other than the daughter in law of Speaker Chamal Rajapakse – the wife of Uva province chief Minister Shavindra. It is after putting her name in front as a shield that the Rajapkse family is conducting this business. Lanka e news had already highlighted this in a report on October 30th under the caption ‘ MP sells formalin – urea as arrack- MaRa’s commission Rs. 300 million monthly’ It was exposed by us in that article , this adulterated arrack which is formalin and urea is being turned out at a factory situated in Dompe , Palugama area. We revealed that this factory is avoiding the payment of legal taxes amounting to Rs. 800 million , whereas it is making an illegal payment of Rs. 300 million to the Rajapakses as extortion money. This payment has to be delivered compulsorily monthly to Temple Trees , and these are made entirely by cash. In addition , to manufacture this arrack , they also import the necessary spirits. Mind you , in SL at the moment the highest quantity of spirits are got down for this adulterated arrack illicit business by the Rajapakses. When formalin worth Rs. 2000 million was imported as spirit , and was seized by the Customs Director General , since the Customs is under the purview of the Finance Ministry that belongs to Rajapakse who is also running this illicit arrack factory putting Leksika in front , on the payment of a penalty of Rs. 3 million , the Customs director General was obliged to release the goods to Lakshman Perera himself. Following this illicit import , Rajapakse turned bitter against the Director General of Customs . Meanwhile , the Rajapakse Govt. issued duty free non transferable import permits for vehicles for Govt. servants. As the LB Finance Co. and LOLC leasing Companies granted leases illegally on these vehicles so got down , the Customs sealed the files of these Companies , and began investigating them. Rajapakse whose concern was for illicit arrack business and the two illegal leasing business magnates come what may, within a night changed the laws and converted the non transferable into transferable permits. On this issue Mahinda Rajapkse fell foul with the Customs Director General who was performing his duties duly. LB Finance Sumith Adhihetty is a close sidekick of MaRa. He employed notorious China Town Mustaq and sneaked on Dr. Neville Gunawardena to MaRa. The latter who is as unscrupulous and sordid as his sidekick fell into his trap . As a result LB chief who is MaRa’s sidekick got what he wanted. China town Mushtaq is an individual who supplies all requirements of the Rajapakses .The latter too does not wait without heeding what Mushtaq tells. In the circumstances , MaRa , had summoned the Customs Director General and berated him . But what provoked MaRa to go that far as to remove Dr. Neville Gunawardena from the post was based on a different ground . That is , creating a rival unwittingly for MaRa’s illicit arrack business . That rival is no less an individual than the Trade Minister Johnston Fernando . The latter following in the footsteps of his ‘Guru’ had imported a quantity of illicit spirits , and after clearing through the Customs had via his tavern embarked on the ‘Gura’s (hora) illegal business .His Gura Rajapakse was infuriated because he alleges that the Customs chief had helped his rival Golaya ( Johniya) , Johnston to surmount the Customs barriers. Rajapakse Gura therefore decided that the Customs chief should be expelled as he had hit him below the belt in his adulterated illicit arrack business by assisting his underling Johniya ( Johnston Fernando) . But what is most irksome and disgusting about Rajapakse’s jungle laws is, its implementation with gay abandon which are causing untold hardships and miseries to all including the judiciary .As in others so in this case , Rajapakse punished the Director General of Customs who acted duly and lawfully while not punishing the real culprit , his Minister Johniya better known as ‘Donkeya’

2013: The Titanic Year?

By Tisaranee Gunasekara -January 3, 2013 

“We were on the Titanic and everyone knew it was hitting the iceberg” Eric Hobsbawm (Interesting Times)

In 2013,Sri Lanka will continue to be blessed with a President who is intent on life-long rule and dynastic succession, at whatever cost; and a Leader of Opposition who unfailingly lends that President a helping hand, at crucial junctures.

The regime’s decision to boycott theAppeal Courthearing is understandable. Having conducted the most indefensible ‘trial’ in living memory, without even the barest show of impartiality or justice, the regime would not want to deal with questions it cannot answer and explanations it cannot provide. Since the impeachment was a witch-trial, the Rajapaksas have no choice but to hug the cloak of impunity ever closer and defy the courts.

The decision by Ranil Wickremesinghe, and it is indeed his decision to ignore the summons of theAppeal Court, is not so logical. It is in the interests of the UNP to assist the courts to uncover and expose the shenanigans of the impeachment. So what made Ranil Wickremesinghe make a decision which will hurt his party, the country and eventually himself (a subjugated court can be used against him, if the Rajapaksas decide that it is in their interests to promote an even more reliable tool as the leader of the UNP)?

The argument about parliamentary sovereignty does not hold water, because in today’s Sri Lanka it is the Rajapaksas who are sovereign. In Rajapaksa Sri Lanka parliamentary sovereignty is as much of a lie, as democracy, human rights, media freedom or a political solution to the ethnic problem. The subjugated UPFA majority in parliament has turned the legislature into a Rajapaksa-doormat. Just last month, the parliament, in violation of a Supreme Court ruling (by a bench headed by Justice Shiranee Thilakawardane), assented to a Bill which seriously eroded parliamentary control over finances, one of the few preserves the 1978 Constitutionleft under sole legislative aegis. In reality, parliamentary sovereignty is as dead as a dodo. It is one thing to embrace the restoration of parliamentary sovereignty as a desirable goal; it is quite another thing to elevate its corpse and strengthen the asphyxiating hand of the executive still further.

Today, both within and outside the impeachment process, the real conflict is between the executive and the judiciary, the Rajapaksas and the courts. The conflict between the legislature and the judiciary is a myth concocted by the Rajapaksas to hide their dynastic purpose; plus provide their puppets in the UPFA – and in the UNP – with a lofty-sounding excuse to do the inexcusable.

Ranil Wickremesinghe is too clever not to know this. His is a political decision, taken not in honest ignorance, but in conscious duplicity. In fact this is not the first time Mr. Wickremesinghe made a decision which brought him some very short-term and extremely ephemeral gains while harming his interests in the medium to long term. And he will persist in committing such small acts of hara-kiri, especially if the Rajapaksas continue to stir the UNP-leadership pot using their other tool, Sajith Premadasa. With the leader and the alternate leader of the main opposition party in thrall to them, the Rajapaksas are in an unassailable position, or will be once they have subjugated the judiciary.

The Consolidation of Rajapaksa Rule

The impeachment, nakedly unfair and glaringly unjust, is the most grievous blow the Rajapaksas have inflicted on Sri Lanka. It will push Sri Lanka beyond the threshold of liveability.

Once the impeachment is through, the Rajapaksas are likely to move ahead with lightening speed to appoint a more amenable chief justice and a more reliable prime minister. Both choices are of seminal importance to the Rajapaksa project. The Shirani Bandaranayake saga would have demonstrated to the Rajapaksas the danger of placing non-family members in positions of power. After all, the Siblings showered the husband of the CJ with undeserving honours, and believed that that would be a sufficient guarantee of her eternal obedience. But Shirani Bandaranayake did thwart the Rajapaksas-purpose, just five months after she became the CJ. In November 2011, a bench headed by Shirani Bandaranayake effectively killed the Town and Country Planning (Amendment) Act (the so called ‘Sacred Areas’ act, which sought to empower the regime to expropriate any piece of land by the simple expedient of fixing a certain label on it). The Supreme Court decreed that this Act cannot be presented in parliament without the consent of all the provincial councils; the regime was compelled to withdraw it. Perhaps that was the day the Rajapaksas decided that Dr. Bandaranayake must either be broken or evicted.

Given this experience, the Siblings would want to ensure that the next CJ and the next PM are totally committed to the Rajapaksa power-project, out of choice or necessity. And they will not hesitate to pick candidates who are appallingly unsuitable. Once the impeachment travesty succeeds, the Rajapaksas will not feel the need to bother about maintaining appearances (except internationally, until the HambantotaCommonwealth Summit is successfully concluded). After all, if the UPFA and the country can digest this impeachment, they can imbibe any abomination, without even a twinge of indigestion or nausea.

2013 is thus likely to be a fortuitous year for the Rajapaksas, however unlucky it may turn out to be for ordinary Lankans. The SLFP’s back is truly broken, as is evident from the grovelling conduct of senior and junior SLFPers throughout the impeachment process. The leasers of the SLMC, the CWC, the EPDP and other minority parties might make occasional noises, but will eventually knuckle down, placing their own powerless positions above their parties and their peoples.

And there is nothing substantial or worthwhile left of the UPFA left.

So 2013 is likely to be a year in which the Rajapaksas consolidate old gains and make new ones: “…the government was planning to make wide-ranging changes to the powers vested with the provincial councils…. Accordingly changes are to be made to laws pertaining to Police powers vested in Councils together with amendments to the law which states that in the event an Act regarding the subjects of provincial councils is to be tabled in parliament it should be passed by all nine provincial councils” (Daily Mirror – 1.1.2013). Once the impeachment is successful and the judiciary subjugated, the regime will be able to bring in any law it likes, including ones which violate constitutional provisions and/or the norms of natural justice. Bad laws will be passed by the subjugated parliament, and implemented to the letter by subjugated courts, rendering insecure the lives of most Lankans.

When Mahinda Rajapaksa won the presidency in November 2005, if someone foretold that this moment will arrive in just seven short years, would we have believed it?

2012 was bad; 2013 cannot but be worse, barring a miracle.

Referring to America’s critical failure to address the issue of gun control, massacre after massacre, Jon Lee Anderson asked, “Where is our threshold for self-awareness? What is our national threshold for shame?” (The New Yorker – 16.12.2012). It is a question we should do well to ask ourselves, as 2013 advances, the Rajapaksas progress and the country regresses.

The pathetic drama of the Rajapaksha Regime is now exposed - Movement for Unite Country with Power

Thursday, 03 January 2013 

Movement for Unite Country with Power sharing states The Supreme Court which has the sole authority for interpreting the supreme law of the country, the constitution, has clearly come out to say that the parliamentary select committee has no authority to exercise judicial power in the case of impeachment of the Chief Justice.

The investigation into the impeachment must be done by a judicial body or tribunal empowered by law to carry out such actions Supreme Court has very clearly indicated that standing orders are not law and cannot be the basis for a judicial tribunal Parliament through a Act can empower such body with judicial power like what the late Anura Bandaranayake the former Speaker said

The pathetic drama of the Rajapaksha Regime is now exposed, as an attempt to undermine the judiciary, the law of the country, and also the parliament itself .

Therefore we appeal to all those who respect democracy and freedom to salute the step taken by the Supreme Court and to mobilize all forces to defeat the conspiracy of Mahinda Regime.

Hon. M.A. Sumanthiran - MP TNA

Dr. Vickramabahu Karunarathne - NSSP

Mano Ganesan - Democratic People's Front

Azath Salley - Muslim Tamil National Alliance

Sirithunga Jayasuriya - United Socialist Party

Sarath Manamendra - Nava Sihala Urimaya

Deputy Speaker: “I Know The Law”

January 3, 2013 

By Goda Perakadoru -

Chandima Weerakkody, Deputy Speaker, has been projecting himself as a constitutional expert in the last few weeks, no doubt to be in the good books of the Mahinda Rajapakse regime. Weerakkody was earlier a staunch supporter of President Chandrika Bandaranaike Kumaratunga. He was the person who was behind initiating contempt proceedings against S.B. Dissanayake at the instance of President Kumaratunga. The offending speech by Dissanayake was made at a Vap Magul Ceremony held at Habaraduwa. Weerakkody was the Sri Lanka Freedom Party organizer of Habaraduwa and was instrumental in getting three of his supporters to complain to the Supreme Court against Dissanayake. After Rajapakse became President, Weerakkody has taken great pains to erase his pro-Chandrika image.

Weerakkody was one of the first to comment on the decision of the Supreme Court in regard to impeachment proceedings against Chief Justice Shirani Bandaranayake. He has stated that Article 107 (3) of the Constitution permits Parliament to provide either by law or Standing Orders for all matters relating to the impeachment of a superior court judge.

Mahinda, Chandima and Susil 

Article 107 (3) is as follows: “Parliament shall by law or by Standing Orders provide for all matters relating to the presentation of such an address, including the procedure for the passing of a such resolution, the investigation and proof of the alleged misbehaviour or incapacity and the right of such Judge to appear and to be heard in person or by representative.”

According to Weerakkody, Parliament is free to provide for all matters relating to the impeachment either by law or Standing Orders and it has opted to use Standing Orders. This is the very question that arose before the Supreme Court. The Court has held that while matters relating to the presentation of an impeachment motion and the passing of a resolution for impeachment can be stipulated by Standing Orders, the conferring of legal powers on a body to make a finding or a decision affecting the rights of a person can only be done by a law of Parliament. It has emphasized that Standing Orders are not ‘law.’

The Court stated as follows: “A Parliamentary Select committee appointed in terms of Standing Order 78A derives its power and authority solely from the said Standing order which is not a law. Therefore a Select Committee appointed under and in terms of Standing Order 78A has no legal power or authority to make a finding adversely affecting the legal rights of a Judge against whom the allegations made in the resolution moved under proviso to Article 107 (2), is the subject matter of the investigation. The power to make a valid finding after investigation contemplated in Article 107 (3) can be conferred on a court, tribunal or a body, only by law and by law alone.” (Underlining by the Court).

The Court further stated: “Matters relating to the presentation of an address and the procedure for the passing of such resolution are matters which can be stipulated by Standing orders but there is nothing to prevent Parliament from providing for such matters by law as well.”

Weerakkody, the new constitutional expert, should have first read the decision of the Supreme Court before commenting on it. In fact, he told the media that he has not seen the judgment.

From Reconciliation to Impeachment: From Citizen to Subject?

SB-THURSDAY, 03 JANUARY 2013 

As we moved into 2012, the buzz- word was reconciliation and with it the acronym - understood by too few of our fellow citizens- was LLRC.  The Lessons Learnt and Reconciliation Commission Report had been presented to the President who in turn had sent it to Parliament.  There was some hope that since the Commission had been set up by the President, that he would accept its recommendations in full and get on with the task of implementation.  After all this was the Commission he and his government had told the world would answer and lay to rest all doubts, queries and allegations about the last stages of the war, in particular.  

The report in English was eventually sent to the Central Bank- yes the Central Bank- for translation into the two official languages so that the majority of Sri Lankans would be able to read it.  This, I understand is now possible, a good nine to ten months later.   Months went by and the international community led by the US at the UN Human Rights Council in Geneva passed an anodyne resolution on Sri Lanka in March 2012, essentially calling on the regime to expedite implementation of the LLRC recommendations, report to the Council on what it intended to do on accountability- which the resolution noted the LLRC fell short on- and avail itself of the assistance of UN bodies in the implementation process.  The High Commissioner for Human Rights was charged with the responsibility of reporting to the Council in a year on progress made with assistance availed of.  India, frustrated, even angered and humiliated by the broken promises of the regime regarding a political settlement, was amongst the 24 countries that voted for the resolution.

The regime first tried to defeat the resolution by sending packs of ministers, officials and apparatchiks to Geneva in a vulgar display of overkill and loutish behaviour.  Having failed, it failed in turn in its scoundrel’s resort to arouse the patriotism of the masses back at home in the full measure it desperately yearned for. By the time of Sri Lanka’s Universal Periodic Review (UPR) in the Council in November, the regime had completed a Human Rights Action Plan and produced an Action Plan for the Implementation of the LLRC recommendations the status of which still remains that of a ‘work in progress’.    

Geneva, March 2012, in this respect was a Rubicon of sorts. It was the first real defeat of the regime and seen by the regime as such, its conduct of the war was on the agenda of a multilateral organization for the first time, India could no longer be taken for granted and there was general agreement even expressed in and by the media that the whole episode was a foreign policy cock –up, pure and simple.  The Permanent Representative to Geneva was axed and eventually went to Havana having said her piece.  The media had a field day – all its tabloid Christmases having come together, so to speak.  One positive result was that in the aftermath of the hysteria about violated sovereignty and other impertinences, the regime showed signs of beginning to learn the art of international relations.  The jury is out though on as to how much and for how long or indeed as to whether the signs were no more than flashes in the pan of defeat and disappointment.

Now at the end of 2012, there are articles on how the LLRC has been forgotten.  A key reason for this – though by no means the sole one – is that the crisis of governance the LLRC report elaborates has been dragged to a new nadir with the shoddy sham of the impeachment of the Chief Justice.  The buzz-word for 2013 is surely “impeachment”; “constitutional crisis” perhaps coming a close second when we are into the second half of this month.  No doubt this will have a bearing on Geneva, March 2013 and the Commonwealth Heads of Government Meeting (CHOGM) in November; no doubt it should.

The point about all of this is how we have regressed.   Take any yardstick of reconciliation and/or governance and you can see how thuggery- literally and metaphorically speaking- in the service of the consolidation of power by the ostensibly strong yet deeply insecure has taken hold and in a way that arguably would make even J.R. Jayewardene and R. Premadasa blush!  What may yet save us now, as it did then, are the efforts of too few daring to dissent and resist the flagrant destruction of the institutions, processes and the political culture of a functioning liberal democracy.  What we had was flawed, but not “floored” to the extent that it is now.

Take reconciliation for instance – where do the violent arrests of students and young people in Jaffna and elsewhere in the north, the continuing land grab in the north and east, the presidential opening of the Lagoon’s Edge Hotel in Nandikadal to service war tourism fit in with it?  What of the fate of the Tamil women inducted into the forces – did they know what they were getting into or was it a case of being “taken into”?  What about the last IDPs from Kepapalivu?  Where was Kepapalivu and where is it now?  How do things happen in post-war Sri Lanka 2012 like in Marble Bay in the east, where as in apartheid South Africa, the land and the sea is roped off for VIPs, forces, and the general public including the inhabitants of the area, respectively?  How does what happened at the Navinna Rajamahaviharaya at the end of November to address the “Muslim threat” to Sinhala Buddhists, reminiscent, according to some accounts, of a meeting of white supremacists in the Deep South of the 1950s USA, happen in post-war Sri Lanka with its extensive, costly and efficient security, law and order machinery, not to mention its Kiri Pani rhetoric of Chintanaya and reconciliation?  How many IDPs could have been housed with the duty that was not levied on racing cars? Why do people from the north and east risk life and limb to end up in camps on Christmas Island?  If they are economic refugees why are they leaving when economic development is supposed to be the priority?  This is only part of it.

Likewise, with governance.  Who interprets the constitution?  Is natural justice a luxury post-war Sri Lanka cannot afford especially if it stands in the way of the regime getting its own way?  As this columnist wrote some time ago and as the president is reported to have said in an inimitably candid statement of his idea of governance – it boils down to “Ape Minihava Beraganna Oney” and therefore it is “Shape Karala Ganna” all the way.  Impunity rules as long as apparatchiks remain so.  Contort, corrupt institutions and processes as a consequence; nurture and sustain a popular culture of subjects not citizens.
As long as she stands her ground, the Chief Justice will be impeached.  The regime have in their ham-fisted, revengeful way made a heroine and a martyr out of her and aroused the legal fraternity in a defence of the judiciary in a way unimaginable in the desolate days of the Eighteenth Amendment and all the assaults on governance and the rule of law by this regime, before and since.  The regime cannot back down now without looking weak and immature at the least.  
And so it comes back to us.  There is every sign of it getting worse before it begins to get better.  This is what comes from destroying the prospects for reconciliation and from the certainty of impeachment, which is illustrative of the crisis of governance.
A disempowered man from Jaffna told me that things there look better but feel worse.  He was an IDP, metaphorically speaking.   
Is this the fate that awaits us who cling to a notion of citizenship?   
The play is the thing; to be a part of and not merely watch.

Sri Lanka Sets For A Constitutional Crisis!

By Laksiri Fernando -January 3, 2013 

Dr Laksiri Fernando

It was incumbent on the Court of Appeal today, 3 January 2013, to rule an order on the writ applications filed by seven petitioners against the impeachment proceedings initiated by the ruling party in Parliament against the Chief Justice on 6 November 2012, coinciding with the Supreme Court ruling on the controversial Divineguma Bill. This Bill was initiated by the brother of the President, Minister Basil Rajapaksa. The Supreme Court ruling pointed out major flaws in the Bill in addition to several contraventions of the country’s constitution, which is supreme.

The ruling of the Court of Appeal says, based on its reference of the matter to the Supreme Court on 20 November 2012, as the writ applications had a major bearing on constitutional interpretation that the Standing Orders are not law and thus the Parliamentary Select Committee (PSC) has no constitutional power to inquire or to determine any misbehaviour on the part of the Chief Justice.

This should have been common sense, at least after the matters were raised, if not for the inglorious political campaign conducted by the ruling party and its media outlets. There are several PSCs under various standing orders, but can they or have they ever prosecuted anybody except on a matter of Parliamentary privileges which is allowed under the constitution? The latter is also a matter that needs to be carefully thought about in a review of the present constitution in the future. Giving any judicial power to Parliamentarians is like giving a razor to a monkey, however much the monkeys call themselves supreme.

It is true that a mock trial was conducted in 1984 against the then Chief Justice, Nevil Samarakoon, but no verdict was given having realized the inherent contradictions of the whole process. The governments in Sri Lanka have so far failed to rectify the situation irrespective of the promises given before the UN Human Rights Committee in 2002. Of course they can even call the UN imperialist or Western conspiracy. What is lacking in the impeachment procedure is an ‘independent judicial component’ outside of Parliament.

Parliamentarians are primarily law makers and not judges. They should bring good laws to the country without relying on the law of the jungle. When they try to transfer roles, trying to be judges instead of being legislators, it is like the donkey trying to do the dog’s job and then getting a good beating. We have a good example of their mockery of trying to act as a judicial tribunal in the PSC’s Kangaroo Court. They undoubtedly surpassed King Kekille.

We should guard ourselves, however, of excessively rejoicing at the Appeals Court ruling or excessively amusing ourselves about the hilarious acts, no doubt, that they conduct because of the serious political implications of the situation. This is a plain and simple, but a serious constitutional crisis. There had been no such a thing in the past. Even the colonial governor finally decided to abide by the decision of the Supreme Court in the Bracegirdle case in 1937. There had been no confrontation between the judiciary and the legislature backed by the executive before. There had been tensions or disagreements which are normal in a democracy under separation of powers. But there had been no head on clash between the two even during JR’s time involving fundamental constitutional issues.

People normally know that the politicians especially when they are in power open their big mouths. But such a venom and hatred against the judiciary as unleashed at present are completely unprecedented. Sri Lanka has experienced industrial strikes, aborted military coups, communal violence, insurrections and even terrorist separatism. But none of these events had led to an institutional or structural crisis in the constitutional framework of the basic democratic system in the country. There had been a decline and a deterioration, but not complete negation. The most problematic factor in the situation is that the onslaught against the so far accepted norms of the judiciary comes from the elected members of Parliament. Have they alienated themselves to such an extent from the accepted norms or do they have or work on a different agenda, knowingly or unknowingly?

There are indications that the country is at cross roads. We have come to a junction where the rulers wanted us to go further in the authoritarian direction. They are promising luxury for a few and only subsistence for the many. They have been painting the surface of the economy but not the substance. They have been neglecting education, health and the poor but emphasising on entertainment and luxuries of the few. First the academics resisted and now the judiciary is resisting in a different and an institutional manner. Some people may be confused because they are the ones who defeated terrorism. But instead of winning peace they are now creating new animosities between the communities.

There are some dangerous pronouncements. President’s brother who holds the armed forces under his tutelage recently announced that there is a foreign conspiracy against the country. He implicated the judiciary directly in this foreign conspiracy. A Sinhala extremist Minister who was a so-called judge in the Kangaroo Court went further and talked about an emerging situation of dual power, between the judiciary and parliament engineered by foreign forces. Many others have been talking in the same lines. These theories or theories of conspiracies cannot be easily dismissed as political rhetoric.

The vehemency of this propaganda must be having an agenda. It cannot simply be to oust the CJ or subjugate the judiciary. The government is undoubtedly is becoming unpopular day by day. They cannot deliver what they have promised. The country is running by leasing the resources to dubious quarters. The surface of the economy is inflated through IMF and Chinese loans. The inflated bubble might burs at any time. There is a widening gap between the expectations and possible achievements among the middle classes and the poor and the rich. The type of economy that they are now running is very much similar to North Korea that requires the squeezing of the democratic system, dissent and freedom of expression further.

We are in a crisis. The term crisis in Chinese parlance is not necessarily a bad thing. It means problems; it means prospects. The prospects are to seize the opportunity and change the situation. The coming months and weeks would be decisive in this respect. Wimal Weerawansa addressing the 7^th Hour (Sathveni Paya) at Rupavahini recently lamented that the crisis was initiated by the judiciary. There is some truth in it in the sense that the judiciary has started asserting its independent role after so much of pressure and bullying in the past. It is a good sign.

With all the best prospects for the people to pressure the government to drop the impeachment charges and respect the independence of the judiciary, one sad thing in the present situation is the ambiguous policy of the main opposition party, the UNP. Their members have declined to respect the summons of the Court of Appeal very much similar to the position of the ruling UPFA. It is an internationally accepted norm that impeachments are subject to judicial review if constitutional transgressions are involved. The present impeachment in Sri Lanka is a clear case in this respect. It is hoped that the UNP soon makes a correction of this position without being too late.

UK Bar Human Rights Committee concerned

Sri Lanka Mirror

(Mirror) - The Bar Human Rights Committee of England and Wales (BHRC) is concerned at the circumstances surrounding the impeachment of the Chief Justice of Sri Lanka, Shirani Bandaranayake, and at reports of attacks against the judiciary and the legal profession within Sri Lanka.

‘The Bar Human Rights Committee reiterates that an independent judiciary, free of any interference from the executive and legislative branches, is a necessary precondition for the fair administration of justice and the promotion and protection of human rights, the release says.

‘Judges should not be removed from office except for serious misconduct, and such a determination is itself a judicial determination which should be carried out by an independent and impartial tribunal which affords the accused person a fair hearing.

‘We have serious concerns about the inquiry conducted by the PSC.

- The PSC was composed of politicians, despite performing a judicial role. The majority were from the Government, at a time when the Chief Justice had been deciding on matters affecting the Government.

- The hearings were not public and no independent international observers were present.

- There appears to have been a wholesale failure to have regard to or respect the basic tenets of the right to a fair hearing: timely disclosure of evidence, adequate time to prepare, the right to test the evidence.

- In addition, it was reported that the Chief Justice was addressed in a way that was “Insulting and intimidating”.

- The PSC failed to address concerns raised by the Chief Justice or by members of the PSC themselves, and purported to conclude a report within 24 hours finding the Chief Justice guilty.

- ‘We call on the Government of Sri Lanka to observe respect for the independence of the judiciary, and not to act on the report of the Parliamentary Select Committee until these concerns have been addressed.

- We note that the Chief Justice has applied to the Court of Appeal to quash findings of the PSC. The application is to be heard on 3 January, but in the meanwhile Court of Appeal has advised the relevant authorities not to act in derogation of the rights of the Chief Justice until the application is heard and concluded.

The Bar Human Rights Committee of England and Wales (“BHRC”) is the international human rights arm of the Bar of England and Wales. It is an independent body concerned with protecting the rights of advocates, judges and human rights defenders around the world.

BHRC statement. Sri Lanka: Impeachment of Chief Justice

London, 2 January 2013

The BHRC voices concern at the circumstances surrounding the impeachment of the Chief Justice of Sri Lanka, Shirani Bandaranayake, and at reports of attacks against the judiciary and the legal profession within Sri Lanka.

To see the full BHRC statement click here

Upload Files: 

sri_lanka_statement_jan_2013.pdf