External Affairs Minister states, international should not operate by accepting diaspora Tamils pressure.

Sunday , 27 January 2013

International should not function by accepting the pressure given by the diaspora Tamils.  The diaspora Tamils in countries they are living and with their country government is exerting pressure to make a stand against Sri Lanka.

Therefore, due to this pressure, we would not accept international interference in the internal affairs of our country. Such statement was made by Sri lanka External Affairs Minister G.L.Peiris who had visited India.

He made these statements to the interview given to an Indian Television channel.

 International interference in the Sri Lanka's internal affairs cannot be accepted. In some countries considerable amounts of diaspora Tamils are living.

Due to their pressure, some countries are having a strong stance against Sri Lanka. However, Sri Lanka would not operate as a football to the foreign elements.  Some elements are attempting to use pressure against Sri Lanka through large resources and media networks.

World society should offer sympathetic cooperation to Sri Lanka which faces a variety of crisis.  We cannot tolerate to take action according to the objectives of those in abroad.

Parliamentary Select Committee can only decide, whether to implement or not the 13th amendment.  Without the corporation of Tamil National Alliance, the Parliamentary Select Committee's functions cannot be continued was mentioned by G.L.Peiris in his interview.

GK depositors push for Sicille’s deportation from UK

In renewed bid after impeachment crisis ends

BY SURESH PERERA-January 26, 2013,

With the impeachment battle to oust CJ Shirani Bandaranayake, where Golden Key figured saliently, now history, distraught depositors last week renewed their efforts to push for the deportation of Mrs. Sicille Kotelawala living in the United Kingdom.

"We insist that she be sent back to face the law in Sri Lanka", Ms. Dushanthi Hapugoda, president, All GKCC Depositors’ Association, reiterated. "After all, she is a key suspect in the Rs. 26 billion scam".

A GK delegation recently handed over a fresh petition to the British High Commission demanding her "immediate expulsion", but a spokesperson for the mission in Colombo declined comment on whether the UK government will consider any such move or not.

"We have no comment on this issue", she said, when contacted by The Sunday Island.Sicille, the wife of GK Chairman, Lalith Kotelawala, left Sri Lanka hours before a judicial warrant for her arrest following the collapse of this Ceylinco subsidiary in December 2008. She has remained overseas since then.

During an earlier meeting with a GK delegation, a senior British diplomat conceded that the British government had extended Mrs. Kotelawala’s visa till 2016, Hapugoda asserted. "This unprecedented move shows that she is being treated as a special case".

"While harboring a suspect in a massive financial fraud, the British government is trying to preach on transparency and good governance to Sri Lanka", Hapugoda protested. "We deplore these despicable double standards".

It is shocking that UK had provided a safe haven to a suspect against whom the International Police (INTERPOL) have also issued a ‘Red Notice’, she noted. "The suspect has been described as a ‘fugitive on the run’".

"Even prior to the diplomat’s admission, we had information she was residing in a plush section of London in the lap of luxury", she said. "The latest we have is that she had thrown many a party during the festive season".

These are the life-long savings of poor depositors – their blood, sweat and tears – that are being used to finance luxurious lifestyles overseas, Hapugoda continued. "This is crime at a time desperate GK investors are committing suicide in despair".

"We have also taken up with the Sri Lankan authorities the need to seek the deportation of Mrs. Kotelawala and also adopting a tough stand against the GK directors, if they fail to honor their commitments", she noted.

The directors were granted bail by the Supreme Court on the undertaking that they will produce a repayment plan and settle 75% of the holdings, but it has failed to materialize even two years after they were freed, she claimed.

The Post-Impeachment Future And The Role Of The Judiciary

By Jayantha Dhanapala And Suriya Wickremasinghe -January 26, 2013 

In several previous statements the Friday Forum expressed its deep concern about, and its opposition to, the manner in which Chief Justice Shirani Bandaranayake was impeached. The entire episode deeply offends all sense of decency and fairplay; it has also earned the opprobrium of responsible international bodies.

Shirani Bandaranayaka CJ

Citizens no longer can rely on fundamental principles of democratic governance to protect their rights and liberties. The manner in which the ruling political group flouted norms of democratic governance and political decency was unprecedented and unacceptable.

The politically charged nature of the impeachment, the denial of natural justice guarantees to the Chief Justice and the crude manner in which she was addressed during theParliamentary Select Committee hearings, the manner in which the ruling party blatantly disregarded the constitutional powers of the Supreme Court, the use of police powers to stifle protest and free movement, and the use of goon squads to vilify and drive fear into those opposed to the impeachment process in the presence of police officers who were humiliated by their helplessness, were all blows dealt to the citizenry by the ruling political group. The principle of separation of powers lies in tatters as Parliament, by all appearances, is acting as nothing but an appendage of the Executive.

In this political landscape, it is the resolute actions of the judiciary that gives a glimmer of hope to the people of Sri Lanka. The judiciary did not cave into the wishes of the Executive as did Parliament. The Courts stood their ground despite the pressures under which we presume they had to function during the impeachment. That can be said irrespective of whether one agrees or disagrees with the judicial opinions expressed by the courts on the constitutionality of the impeachment process.

As citizens we take heart that at least one branch of the government has displayed its determination not to succumb to the gravitational pull of the Executive during this crisis. Our hope is that the independence of the judiciary remains strong in the difficult period that awaits us. We do not underestimate the challenges lying ahead. The judiciary now has to contend with a Chief Justice whose appointment is fraught with controversy and whose previous partiality toward the Executive is under scrutiny.

The country relies on the judiciary to uphold the Constitution and to exercise the judicial power it holds in trust for the people without fear or favour. Failure would result in a disaster for the nation that will take generations to put right.

Jayantha Dhanapala and Suriya Wickremasinghe
On behalf of Friday Forum, the Group of Concerned Citizens

Jayantha Dhanapala, Suriya Wickremasinghe. Rt. Rev. Duleep de Chickera, Shanthi Dias, Dr. Upatissa Pethiyagoda, Anne Abeysekara, Faiz-ur Rahman, Damaris Wickramasekera, Dr. Selvy Thiruchandran, Rev. Dr. Jayasiri Peiris, Tissa Jayatilaka, Javid Yusuf, Manouri Muttetuwegama, Dr. Deepika Udagama, Professor Arjuna Aluwihare, Dr. A. C. Visvalingam, Dr. Devanesan Nesiah, Lanka Nesiah, Ahilan Kadirgamar, J.C.Weliamuna, Dr. Jayampathy Wickramaratne, Sithie Tiruchelvam, D.Wijayanandana, Ranjit Fernando, Danesh Casie Chetty, Dr. Camena Guneratne, Dr. Geedreck Usvatte-aratchi, Chandra Jayaratne,

Maintain Commonwealth rules in the proper manner. Britain request from Sri Lanka

Britain is expecting Sri Lanka government to maintain in the proper manner the Commonwealth values,   because Sri Lanka government is arranging the year 2013 Commonwealth government leaders’ conference in Sri Lanka. 

British External Affairs Minister Alistair Burt made this statement.

Regarding his visit to Sri Lanka he met Sri Lanka High Commissioner Chris Nonis and had a discussion.

British External Affairs Minister Alistair Burt, who is on a visit to Sri Lanka next week, will personally come on a live discussion over twitter concerning Sri Lanka was mentioned by him.

British Embassy located in Colombo notifies that Alistair Burt who is visiting Sri Lanka on February 1st will attend and address at the convention held at the Lakshman Kathirgamar Central center.

Minister Burt last week attended the debate concerning Sri Lanka organized at the British people’s representatives’ council and delivered a small speech. In his speech he said, “Cannot notify in advance whether Britain will participate the Commonwealth conference which is scheduled to be held in November in Sri Lanka.” 

Saturday , 26 January 2013

In Praise Of Shirani Bandaranayake

By R.M.B Senanayake -January 26, 2013

RMB Senanayake

Shirani Bandaranayake has gone home, thrown out of office sans pension, sans dignity which was stripped from her by those who claim to be acting in the name of the majority.

“Majorities do not decide what is right or wrong; your conscience does. So why should a citizen surrender his or her conscience to a legislator? For we must NEVER EVER kneel down before the tyranny of a majority!” – Samantha Booke. In the Great Debaters.

Shirani Bandaranayake has done just that. The Courts have quashed the decision against her. She was not given the rights extended to every person under our law- the right to natural justice. She is a victim of man’s inhumanity to man. She refused to resign and we applaud her for that ; for it is a great sacrifice on her part for the cause of the Rule of Law and the independence of the Judiciary. Our selfish , hypocritical politicized society is characterized by everyone working in his or her own greedy self-interests and huddling together with those of their tribe, at war with all those outside who they regard as enemies to be beaten into submission by hook or by crook. What breaks a human mind out of that iron cage of selfishness is a sacrifice. The martyr who gives up everything, who abandons all personal gain, who lays down his life for the good of those outside his group is the hero for us Christians. . “You will have to make up for the smallness of your size by your courage and selfless devotion to duty, for it is not life that matters, but the courage, fortitude and determination you bring to it.” ― Muhammad Ali Jinna. Shirani Bandaranaike ought to become a symbol for all those who stand for the Rule of Law and Justice like Abraham Lincoln or Patrick Henry.

She has offered a sacrifice – a sacrifice of her career for what is a valuable principle in a society- the Rule of Law and the Independence of the Judiciary. She will long be remembered for her courage in the face of all the taunts, the mudslinging and the mob terror unleashed on her by those responsible for the impeachment and whoever was behind them. She acted according to the dictates of her conscience in giving judgment on the Divineguma Bill. She could have obliged the powers that be by giving an opinion which the authorities wanted. She didn’t, preferring to act according to her conscience. She could have resigned and preserved her future career rather than face the indignity of being found guilty even though by a body declared as illegal by the highest Courts of the land. She is an exceptional person indeed for most of our high officials prefer to look after their personal interests rather than stand up for a principle. She acted according o her conscience and paid a heavy price for it. Conscience is the moral intuition and Christians consider it the voice of God in the soul.” It is the knowledge that one must always do right and never wrong, the knowledge of one’s absolute obligation to goodness, all goodness: justice and charity and virtue and holiness; only in the second place is it the knowledge of which things are right and which things are wrong.

But even her accusers refer to their conscience, like the devil quoting Scripture. But as pointed out by Cardinal Newman(1801-1890) conscience can be invoked even to justify evil actions – He wrote thus :Conscience is a stern monitor, but in this century it has been superseded by a counterfeit, which the eighteen centuries prior to it never heard of, and could not have mistaken for it, if they had. It is the right of self-will.” —Conscience has rights because it has duties; but in this age, with a large portion of the public, it is the very right and freedom of conscience to dispense with conscience, to ignore a Lawgiver and Judge, to be independent of unseen obligations.

“The leader for the time being, whoever he may be, is but an instrument, to be used until broken and then to be cast aside; and if he is worth his salt he will care no more when he is broken than a soldier cares when he is sent where his life is forfeit in order that the victory may be won.” ― Theodore Roosevelt

Threat of fundamental cases being nullified

SUNDAY, 27 JANUARY 2013

Legal experts point out there is the likelihood of most of the human rights and fundamental cases filed against the detention of persons due to the Criminal Procedure (Special Provision) act that was passed on the 22nd being nullified.

The situation has arisen due to the act being passed as a retroactive bill. The new act has been passed so that it is effective from 31st March, 2009. As such, all fundamental cases filed against detention of 24 hours get nullified as the act has sanctions to detain those arrested for 48 hours point out legal experts.

The act states, “Where during the period commencing on May 31, 2009 and ending on the date of the coming into operation of this Act, any power, duty or function was exercised performed of discharged by or under Criminal Procedure (Special Provisions) Act, No42 of 2007, such power, duty or function which was executed, performed or discharged, as the case may be, shall, notwithstanding that the provisions of the said Criminal Procedure (Special Provisions) Act, No.42 of 2007 was not in operation during the aforementioned period, be deemed to have been validly exercised, performed or discharged, as the case may be, as if the said Act was in operation during such aforementioned period.”

As such, all fundamental rights cases filed since 31st May, 2009 could be nullified and also this would have drastic regressive effects on the country point out legal experts.

Sri Lanka hotel in hot water over 'Buddha Bar' dinner

Posted: 27 January 2013 1657 hrs

	Click to enlarge Photos 1 of 1 File photo of Sri Lankan Special Task Force (STF) soldiers stand guard outside the Colombo High Court in 2011.(AFP - Ishara S.Kodikara)

COLOMBO: Two hotel managers have been arrested in Sri Lanka for organising a "nirvana-style" dinner with "Buddha Bar" music that hurt the religious feelings of locals, police said Sunday.

The executives from a deluxe beach hotel at Beruwala, outside of the capital, were remanded in custody till Monday after allegations that their promotional material offended Buddhists, police spokesman Prisantha Jayakody said.

"The two managers were arrested on a charge of causing offence to Buddhists," Jayakody told AFP. "We took them into custody a few days ago and produced them before a magistrate after a complaint from a Buddhist monk."

The hotel management said an internal memo to staff described the dinner last week as a "nirvana-style" buffet with Buddha Bar music, but they meant no offence to any religious group.

Sri Lanka has slapped a de facto ban on albums of Buddha Bar, the trendy Paris nightspot known for its lounge music.

The majority Buddhist nation has also been sensitive to the use of Buddha images on clothing such as T-shirts and bikinis.

Sri Lanka's extreme nationalists who are mainly followers of Buddhism have stepped up a self-appointed role of religious police in recent months, causing tension among minorities on the island.

- AFP/ck

Colombo, Tamil Nadu & New Delhi What's In Them For Sri Lankan Tamils?

Kusal Perera Salem-News.com-Jan-26-2013

The changing scenario in Tamil politics begins with 2005's presidential elections.

Still Living on Sinhala Sentiments

Kusal Perera

(COLOMBO, Sri Lanka) - The impeachment against Chief Justice Dr. Ms. Shirani Bandaranayake was brought to an end with the Rajapaksa government shunning the determination of the apex Courts in Hulftsdorp, to remove her and appoint on 15 January, the new Chief Justice. Its trusted choice, former Attorney General and thereafter Legal Advisor to the Cabinet of Ministers, Mohan Peiris. The SC ruled the whole Parliamentary Select Committee process to impeach the CJ, as illegal. The impeachment as a public issue died off with Mohan Peiris the new CJ assuming office. This new political twist in Sri Lanka would have a serious impact on the Tamil political scene and on everything else in the country.

The changing scenario in Tamil politics begins in the year 2005 with presidential elections. The “common presidential candidate” of the “progressives and the Left”, PM Mahinda Rajapaksa, launched his vision of a new Sri Lanka titled “Mahinda Chinthana”. In that he said, “No sooner I am elected to office, I shall commence extensive discussions with all political parties represented in parliament, based on the above stated fundamental concepts. At the same time, I shall start discussions with political parties that are not represented in parliament as well.” (pages 31 – 32)

The Old School Gandhian

NO mandate therefore was asked for from the people, nor was any promise given to the people, on any war against the LTTE, as a solution to the ethnic conflict.

The broad concept proposed for a solution to the on going conflict was, “devolution” and NOT decentralisation. “My intention is to devolve powers to the level of the citizen” (page 32), he said in his “Mahinda Chinthana” booklet.

In just over 02 years in year 2008 when an untold of war was being brutally escalated in North and East, at the first Universal Periodic Review (UPR) on Human Rights that took Sri Lanka's case in April that year, the GoSL had by then given an assurance, it will stand committed for a political settlement on devolution. An Indian official was then quoted as saying, “This is not just a commitment made to India, but to international agencies too.”

Too Much West & US Too

In January 2010 the second edition of the same “Mahinda Chinthana”, was re-launched for the presidential elections on 26 January. That (in Sinhala version) said, “Meanwhile the All Party Conference was continued with a Representative Committee, bringing serious political issues into broad discussions. Instead of forcing solutions from top, this process brought together a broad consensus between political parties, civil organisations and the people themselves.” (page 55)

In 2011 May, over 01 year later and 02 years after the savage conclusion of the war, when External Affairs Minister Prof. G.L. Peiris visited New Delhi, the two External Affairs Ministers who reviewed the entire gamut of bilateral relations, issued a joint statement on 17 May covering 11 issues including that of a permanent solution to the Tamil political conflict. That joint statement said, [quote] 4. Both sides agreed that the end of armed conflict in Sri Lanka created a historic opportunity to address all outstanding issues in a spirit of understanding and mutual accommodation imbued with political vision to work towards genuine national reconciliation. In this context, the External Affairs Minister of Sri Lanka affirmed his Government’s commitment to ensuring expeditious and concrete progress in the ongoing dialogue between the Government of Sri Lanka and representatives of Tamil parties. A devolution package, building upon the 13th Amendment, would contribute towards creating the necessary conditions for such reconciliation. [unquote]

Too Much Competition On Tamil Rhetoric

Even in May 2011, the Rajapaksa regime was still marking time, with promises to build upon the 13^thAmendment. After another year and a half, they tried testing the water for change of course. In October 2012, Gotabhaya Rajapaksa, a public servant as Secretary to the Ministry of Defence with absolutely no right to indulge in politics told the media, the 13 Amendment to the Constitution should be repealed immediately. “The Island” news paper on 13 October quoted him as saying, “... the 13th Amendment was nothing but an impediment to the post-war development process.” It further quoted him elaborating, “People should realize the external interference will not be beneficial. Whatever the party in power, it must have the freedom to take decisions for the benefit of the majority of Sri Lankans," Provincial Councils (PC) were established with the signing of the Indo-SL Accord in July, 1987 that brought in the 13 Amendment.

Neo Gandhian Profiteers

With the Divi Neguma Bill made law, that centralises all ground level, local initiatives under a central government Minister, PCs under the 13 Amendment now have their mandate for local development, sabotaged and hijacked. Its in such context, the new call for the repeal of the 13 Amendment gets the nod from the political authority in Colombo. It is also in such political context, Prof Peiris once again in New Delhi to co-chair the 08^th Session of the Joint Commission, inks a joint statement with his Indian Counterpart, Salman Khurshid on 22 January (2013), that covers everything under the sun, except “devolution”, a political settlement and the 13 Amendment to the Constitution. This latest joint statement thus negates the commitment New Delhi gave in its joint statement made on 17 May, 2011 under section 4. A clear indication, times have changed for Tamil politics.

This now brings to a complete halt, the diplomatic and political pressure the TNA was calculating through New Delhi. This regime's promise for a “political solution” based on the 13^th Amendment camouflaged as a “home grown” solution, was used to buy time and space to drag the issue without serious initiatives in finding an acceptable answer. Meanwhile New Delhi was only interested in drowning Tamil Nadu (TN) rhetoric, to work on economic and trade issues, promising there would be development benefits percolating to the North and the Vanni.

The joint statement issued (22 January) thus says, “Both sides comprehensively reviewed the entire gamut of bilateral relations, including trade, investment, development co-operation, science and technology, power, agriculture, health, people to people contacts, connectivity, culture and education, and expressed satisfaction at the substantive developments in bilateral relations....” (No. 2 of statement) New Delhi's efforts are now about caring for the Indian business and GoSL is happy it could increase trade with India to the tune of USD 10 billion in the next 03 years. They have thus signed bi lateral agreements on combating “International Terrorism and illicit drug trafficking” and most importantly, a “Revised Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement”.

The two countries now don't have much reason to review the follow up action on the LLRC recommendations, the government submitted as its Action Plan in its report to the UPR in November 2012. Therefore with absolutely no mention of a political solution, the joint statement goes on to say, the two countries recognise “the need to build a special economic partnership framework to achieve the shared goals of poverty alleviation, job creation and economic development for the people of the two countries, the two sides decided to take several steps to further deepen trade, tourism and investment relations.” (No.4)

With India side stepping on its previously vowed responsibility, what now makes politics of minorities far more difficult is this Rajapaksa regime's hold on the apex Courts of the judiciary, after it impeached CJ Bandaranayake. India now looking the other way, this regime could now go for any decision they wish, with more confidence than when Sarath N Silva as CJ, bifurcated the merged North – East province in favour of Sinhala politics.

This regime does not allow its Sinhala backing to fade off. Therefore, its a Sinhala influenced judiciary that would henceforth sit on any Tamil political issue, if the regime wants it that way.

That impeachment too was not of any concern to New Delhi. But how the two regimes were able to reach such compromise to drop the SL Tamil issue is also because of faulty reading of geo political necessities of the present New Delhi regime, by Tamil political leadership. The SL Tamil issue was used by the Indira Gandhi rule 32 years ago, to warn President Jayawardne against going too much West and towards the US. India then was very much Non Aligned and for Soviet Russia. Today, it is a different India in a different world order. There is neither a Soviet bloc, nor a non Aligned movement as then. India is no more a closed and a heavily regulated economy and no more anti US. The New Delhi regime, since its shift to neo liberal economics, has given up on its principled stand on Human Rights and democratic rule, except its pretence for such. This neo Gandhian rule therefore supported the Myanmar military Junta with economic and development packages. They have entered into a military co-operation agreement with China since 2008 and increased its trade with China too.

Interestingly, Sajjad Shaukat, an international affairs critic and the author of the book “US vs Islamic Militants”, writing to “Global Reach” on 13 December 2012, about US Drone Attacks said, “Besides, Pakistan is the only nuclear country in the Islamic world. Hence, the U.S., India and Israel are determined to weaken it. The drone campaign is also part of this game.”

That's an interesting “triumvirate” in this new world where old alliances have given way to new, undemocratic and selfish alliances. The SL Tamil issue has no importance to New Delhi within such alliances.

The fault with the TNA is that it has not read through this neo Gandhian perspective of India. The TNA still believes TN politics that rhetorically is pro Tamil, would be a factor in pushing New Delhi into compromises. That local public lobbying and mobilising could be substituted with international and regional alliances and agencies. None of it would work, without adequately strong pressure on this Rajapaksa regime, here in Colombo.

What this Rajapaksa regime slipped on is, the APRC it allowed as a political cover up of the war. As often happens in politics, most issues gather their own momentum and at times go out of hand. So were the APRC and the LLRC. As for the LLRC, the TNA left its political importance aside to keep in step with the Tamil Diaspora and have thus lost good time. The time lost by TNA was used by this regime to dilute and contradict LLRC Recommendations. They have now come out with a special report on the war by the military that counters the LLRC Report and its recommendations.

The APRC final report handed over to the President over two years ago is different and still has political punch. It could have been President Rajapaksa's “Waterloo”, had the TNA raised it as the basis for a discussion, although they were not party to its formulation. With President Rajapaksa appointing an Experts Committee too to assist the APRC, the 21 Chapter draft presented to the APRC by its Chairman, Prof Tissa Vitharana, took almost two years to conclude its deliberations. “APRC discussed each of the chapters separately seeking inputs from political parties through their representatives at the APRC”, say MP R. Yogarajan and Nizam Kariapper in their introduction to the compilation they presented as the equivalent to the APRC Final Report. The discussions had concluded in June 2010 after 128 meetings, with consensus on all 21 chapters.

To have such consensus is a mammoth achievement where all shades of Sinhala politics participated from the SLFP, through MEP to the JHU along with the EPDP, CWC and Mano Ganesan, apart from the LSSP and the CP of SL. It is certainly a huge waste by TNA, not taking this consensus as the basis for all future discussions in seeking a permanent solution. Though President Rajapaksa made the LLRC Final Report public, he fears to have this APRC Final Report public, purely because of the political consensus it has achieved. IF the TNA is willing to make a public campaign to have it as the basis for the proposed PSC, that would change the whole scenario once again. But that campaign has to be in Colombo and has to have the Colombo Tamils on the streets. There are over 100,000 SL Tamils residing in Colombo according to the 2011 Census table in the official website of the department. Its time the TNA reaches to them for active political participation. There is total absence of Tamil politics in Colombo since 1956 when the FP went on a historic “Sathyagraha” on Galle face green against the Sinhala ONLY official language Act. Its time the TNA broke that self imposed absence and got on the streets of Colombo. Its Colombo where power resides and decisions are made. Its in Colombo where power has to be challenged to have new decisions made.

(Written on invitation for the Sri Lankan Tamil magazine, “ Samakaalam”)

Kusal Perera

Impeachment: President Rajapaksa Has Got Imprisoned In Latimer House

By Ranil Wickremesinghe -January 27, 2013 

Ranil Wickremesinghe

Latimer House, widely talked about in recent times, located in Buckinghamshire, England, has a remarkable history of its own. In the mid 17th Century, a civil war took place between England’s King Charles I and Parliament. The King’s army lost. Thereafter in 1647, Charles I was imprisoned in Latimer House before he was taken to London.

The original building was burnt to the ground by a fire in 1830s. The owners of the property, the Cavendish family (the descendants of the fifth Prime Minister of the UK, the Duke of Devonshire) rebuilt the mansion and it is this structure, which stands today. Latimer House, like many other old castles and mansions, has become a hotel. It is here that in June 1998 that the Commonwealth Parliamentary Association, the Commonwealth Legal Education Association, the Commonwealth Magistrates’ and Judges’ Association and the Commonwealth Lawyers’ Association summoned a conference to discuss the implementation of the Harare Commonwealth Declaration with regard to the Commonwealth parliaments and the judiciary.

In 1991, the Commonwealth Heads of Government Meeting (CHOGM) took place in Harare to build on the principles of good governance to which they had previously agreed in Singapore in 1971 (the Singapore Declaration of Commonwealth Principles). They pledged that “the Commonwealth and its constituent countries work ‘with renewed vigour’, concentrating especially on the following areas:

The protection and promotion of the fundamental political values of the Commonwealth;

Democracy, democratic processes and institutions which reflect national circumstances, the rule of law and the independence of the judiciary, just and honest government;

Fundamental human rights, including equal rights and opportunities for all citizens regardless of race, colour, creed or political belief;”                                                        Read More

WikiLeaks: Fight Against Terrorism Is Not Over, Rudrakumaran Is Still In The US – MR To US

By Colombo Telegraph -January 27, 2013

“Finally, the president said that the GSL’s fight against terrorism was not over and that extremist networks continued working abroad and even now had no problem raising money. He noted that Tamil activist Rudrakumaran was still in the U.S. and claimed he was still working to support the LTTE. On the rest of the Tamil diaspora, the president complained that while they were quick with their criticisms of the GSL, most of them had not set foot in Sri Lanka in years.” the US Embassy Colombo informed Washington.

Visuvanathan Rudrakumaran - Prime Minister TGTE

A Leaked ‘Confidential’ US diplomatic cable, dated September 18, 2009, updated the Secretary of State regarding Ambassador Patricia Butenis’s credentialing ceremony and a private meeting she had with the President Mahinda Rajapaksa. The Colombo Telegraph found the related leaked cable from the WikiLeaks database. The cable is signed by the US Ambassador to Colombo Patricia Butenis.

Ambassador Butenis wrote;  ”Turning to the NGOs engaged in relief efforts, the president said that after the 2004 tsunami, 3,000 NGOs came to Sri Lanka, but some of them began working with the LTTE. Nevertheless, the GSL was now allowing over 50 NGOs to work in the IDP camps along with the UN. Rajapaksa then criticized the UN for — against GSL advice — building poor temporary shelters for the IDPs, who were now suffering. (NOTE: This is a standard GSL criticism. In fact, the UN from the start had warned the GSL of the dangers of flooding in the camps and had refused to build the permanent structures to house IDPs that the GSL wanted because the UN did not want to assist in building internment camps. END NOTE.)”

“Ambassador underscored the value of the larger bilateral relationship and noted the great potential that existed for expanding our cooperation in many areas. She stressed, however, that the IDP issue had to be resolved and that until it was, U.S.-Sri Lankan relations would be affected.” Butenis further wrote.

Placing a comment she wrote; “ President Rajapaksa had little new to say on GSL policies, but his initial meeting with ambassador was cordial. The FM and others said several times that the speed of the scheduling of ambassador’s credentialing was meant as a signal of the GSL’s desire to put the bilateral relationship on a new footing. There is, indeed, great potential for expanding and improving the relationship, but as ambassador noted to the president, lack of movement by the GSL on IDP freedom of movement and other issues could seriously hamper progress.”

Read the cable below for further details;

Related stories to this cable;

WikiLeaks: Bush Personally Had Encouraged Rajapaksa To Pursue Defeat Of The LTTE

Marx On The Freedom Of The Press

By Mark L Thomas -

Karl Marx

January 25, 2013 

Marx was a prolific journalist – but he has been cited by different people as either a Stalinist censor or a liberal defender of the press. Mark L Thomas looks at what Marx said about press freedom

Following the Leveson report into phone hacking the pages of the Daily Telegraph, of all places, recently witnessed a spat over Karl Marx‘s attitude towards press freedom. The Reverend Peter Mullen declared that those MPs who advocate some form of state regulation of the press stood in the tradition of Marx, who, he tells us, “hated a free press”. Rushing to Marx’s defence was Brendan O’Neil, the editor of Spiked Online (a right wing libertarian website that likes to pretend its part of the left). O’Neil insisted that, on the contrary, Marx was a fervent champion of press freedom, even if this means tolerating the excesses of the tabloids.

So, which is the real Karl Marx; the Stalinist censor or the liberal defender of the likes of Murdoch? Unsurprisingly, it’s neither, though Marx certainly did have some very important things to say about press freedoms. As the crusading editor of the Rheinische Zeitung (Rhineland News), between October 1842 until it was suppressed in the spring of 1843, Marx at the age of just 24 was responsible for the most radical (and increasingly successful) newspaper in Germany. Inevitably, this meant he repeatedly clashed with the newspaper censors of the Prussian state.

Becoming a communist

This period was a crucial one in Marx’s intellectual and political development. As Hal Draper points out it was his experiences on RZ that “transformed him from a radical-democratic liberal, into a revolutionary-democratic communist” as his idealist worldview taken over from the philosopher Hegel clashed against the material realities of the Prussian state and emerging capitalist property relations.

To see how Marx approached the question of press freedom it is necessary to note the historical circumstances Marx confronted. Germany in the early 1840s was a far cry from the economic powerhouse that emerged half a century later. In comparison to Britain and France it was very backward economically and socially. Germany was not even a unified state in this period (this didn’t take place until 1871). Rather it was a patchwork of kingdoms and duchies, with Prussia’s absolutist monarchy the dominant power.

The Rhineland, Marx’s birthplace, was an exception to this overall picture of German backwardness. It was the most industrialised and socially advanced part of Germany. It had also been part of revolutionary France between 1795 and 1815, before Prussia annexed it, and its prosperous bourgeoisie was among the most radical in Germany. It was these wealthy liberal opponents of Prussian absolutism who set up and financed RZ to champion their views.

Defender of press freedom

Marx’s defence of press freedom against censorship ranks among the most powerful ever expressed. Censorship, railed Marx,

“exercises tutelage over the highest interest of the citizens, their minds… You marvel at the delightful diversity, the inexhaustible riches of nature. You do not ask the rose to smell like a violet; but the richest of all, the mind, is supposed to exist in only a single manner?”

Authoritarian states invariably insist that the people are “not ready” for political freedoms, including a free press. Marx points to the contradiction this leads to;

“to fight freedom of the press, one must maintain the thesis of the permanent immaturity of the human race… If the immaturity of the human race is the mystical ground for opposing freedom of the press, then certainly censorship is a most reasonable means of hindering the human race from coming of age.”

For advocates of censorship,

“true education consists in keeping a person swaddled in a cradle all his life, for as soon as he learns to walk he also learns to fall, and it is only through falling that he learns to walk. But if we all remain children in swaddling-clothes, who is to swaddle us? If we all lie in a cradle, who is to cradle us? If we are all in jail, who is to be the jail warden?”

If historical circumstances dictate that a people are unready to be free, then how has one section of the population, which just happens to be those who rule, somehow been able to escape this fate? And who polices the police?

But does Marx’s powerful attack on the censorship of the press by the state place in him the camp of those would say we must simply accept the existing press, warts and all, as the price of freedom? To see why this would be to miss the real point Marx is making, we need to note two things. Firstly, Marx’s goal is not simply the freedom of the press for its own sake. He sees it as part of wider fight for democratic freedoms. The “press, in general, is a realisation of human freedom,” he writes.

Secondly, Marx, even while he still accepted the necessity of private property during his period as editor of RZ, was already starting to challenge the notion that the freedom of the property-owner is the freedom of all. So he writes scathingly,

“to put freedom of the press in a class under freedom of business is to defend it while killing it in the of course of the defense… Your freedom is not my freedom, cries the press to business… is the press free if it degrades itself to a business? To be sure, the writer must make money in order to be able to exist and write, but on no account must he exist and write in order to make money.”

So for Marx, democratic freedom must not be “degraded” into a tool for promoting the interests of the rising bourgeoisie.

The ever vigilant eye

A free press for Marx must be engaged in uncovering real social, political and economic conditions that exist in order to increase the mass of the population’s understanding of their world and their confidence to challenge it, even if he still expresses this in the old idealist language of the philosopher Hegel that he hadn’t yet thrown off;

“a free press is the ever vigilant eye of the people’s spirit, the embodiment of the people’s trust in itself… It is the people’s outspoken self-confession, whose redeeming power is well known. It is a spiritual mirror, in which a people discover itself.”

Freedom, not business

Indeed, Marx pointedly states, “the first freedom of the press is not to be a business.” In other words, Marx separates the practice of journalism from the existence of the press as a commercial enterprise. As Hanno Hardt has shrewdly observed, for Marx, “the notion of freedom of the press implies the achievement of freedom of expression; for Marx it is an individual or collective right that governs the relations between journalists…and public and private authorities, including the owners of the press itself.”

Hardt draws this telling conclusion, “In this sense, [Marx's] writings on press freedom are also aimed at the emancipation of newsworkers from the ownership of the means of communication, that is from the domination by publishers and stockholders.”

Marx did not advocate external state censorship. But nor did he champion the “internal” censorship practised by those who own the media under capitalism and who are able to dictate the underlying assumptions and, where they deem fit, the actual content of the press they own.

Courtesy Socialist Review, January 2013