Gold Coast chosen to host 2018 Commonwealth Games

 Friday, 11 November 2011
Gold Coast has a population of more than 500,000

The 2018 Commonwealth Games will be held in Gold Coast after the Australian city beat off the challenge of Sri Lanka's Hambantota.

The decision was made at a meeting of the Commonwealth Games Federation on the Caribbean island of St Kitts.

Gold Coast, in south east Queensland, won by 43 votes to 27.

Australia has hosted the games four times previously in the event's 80-year history while Sri Lanka was bidding to host the games for the first time.

Gold Coast's bid was based largely on the use of existing facilities while Hambantota, a city devastated by the 2004 Boxing Day tsunami, promised to deliver new stadiums, an international airport and other infrastructure by 2016.

"Congratulations to the Gold Coast, to Queensland and Australia - we did it." she said.Queensland Premier Anna Bligh, who was in St Kitts for the announcement, expressed her delight at the result.

"In 2018 we will be ready to host a unique world-class and friendly event that builds on the Commonwealth brand and enhances our city's reputation.

"This city will be transformed with new infrastructure and a buzz that only a big international event like this can bring.

"Today we hit the bullseye - 2018 is the Gold Coast's time to shine."

The main Metricon Stadium, home of Australian Rules Football Club the Gold Coast Suns, recently increased its capacity to 25,000 spectators.

It will be further enhanced by temporary seating for the Games increasing its capacity to 40,000.

The games are scheduled to take place in April 2018.

The next games, in 2014, are to be held in Glasgow.

Women Left Behind: Truth Commissioning in Sri Lanka

*groundview journalism For citizens 

A mother displaying the photographs of his sons which are missing during the Lessons Learnt and Reconciliation Commission (LLRC) session in Trincomalee, December, 3-5, 2010. Photo courtesy Centre for Human Rights

The power and promise of national exercises like the LLRC lie in the way that they can access the voices of those who have not traditionally been heard, and use them to build a more representative and inclusive collective memory. Yet for Sri Lanka’s Tamil women, the LLRC simply reaffirms bad old habits, writes Jo Baker [i]

In the lead up to the release of the report by Sri Lanka’s Lessons Learned and Reconciliation Commission (LLRC), strong concerns have been publicly raised about the value of a process that aims to build a clear picture of the conflict, without fully including or representing those who were most directly affected. This has led to important questions regarding who has been heard, how their concerns have been addressed, and whether they will feature fully in a final report and its recommendations. While such questions have focused on vital themes of accountability, ethnic discrimination and political will, often in relation to internationally-agreed standards, they have been resoundingly quiet in a criticalarea: the space and consideration being given to women.    Continue reading »
---------------------------------------------

Truth and Reconciliation Commission

TRC FINAL REPORT

All documents are in  PDF format and require Acrobat Reader to open.

• TRC Final Report - Summary and Guide to Contents
• TRC Final Report - Volume 1 (1.4 MB)
• TRC Final Report - Volume 2 (1.7 MB)
• TRC Final Report - Volume 3 (2.2 MB)
• TRC Final Report - Volume 4 (832 KB)
• TRC Final Report - Volume 5 (1.1 MB)

• TRC Final Report - Volume 6 - Foreword (137 KB)
• TRC Final Report - Volume 6 - Section 1 (718 KB)
• TRC Final Report - Volume 6 - Section 2 (995 KB)
• TRC Final Report - Volume 6 - Section 3 (1.8 MB)
• TRC Final Report - Volume 6 - Section 4 (515 KB)
• TRC Final Report - Volume 6 - Section 5 (1.1 MB)
• TRC Final Report - Volume 6 - Section 6 (314 KB)

• TRC Final Report - Volume 7 - Part 1 (11O KB)
• TRC Final Report - Volume 7 - Part 2 (2.3 MB)
• TRC Final Report - Volume 7 - Part 3 (2.2 MB)
• TRC Final Report - Volume 7 - Part 4 (2.6 MB)
• TRC Final Report - Volume 7 - Part 5 (345 KB)

Summary and Guide to Contents

SUMMARY OF CONTENTS

The report of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission (the Commission) consists of five volumes, each with a particular focus. It is important to note that, once the Amnesty Committee finishes its work, an additional volume will report on the work of that Committee, based on amnesty hearings conducted and findings made. That volume will also include summaries of the statements of those people the Commission found to have suffered gross violations of human rights. While the current report contains a full list of the names of those in respect of whom such findings were made, the codicil will include details of the violations.

The bulk of the findings of the Commission may be found in the final volume, as indicated below. However, specific findings are made in individual chapters throughout the report.

The logical sequence of the five volumes of the report is as follows.

Full Story>>>

Norway granted $366m to Sri Lanka

Minister Solheim says President Rajapaksa should be 'magnanimous' in military victory Norway has granted 2.5 billion NOK ($366million) to Sri Lanka from 1997-2009, a report issued by Norwegian Agency for Development Cooperation (Norad) stated. The money has been provided to the Sri Lankan government, Norwegian and Sri Lankan non governmental organisations (NGOs) and the Tamil Tigers, according to Norad evaluation report on Sri Lanka’s peace process. The report says that the funds provided to majority of Sri Lankan NGOs have been properly dispersed. “One important exception is the Milinda Moragoda Inst together with the Indian NGOs Horison and Sarvatra,” says the report. The Milinda Moragoda Inst formed by former minister Milinda Moragoda has received more than 60 million NOK. Accountability Mr Moragoda who was a member of the negotiating team on behalf of Ranil Wickramasinghe administration later defected to Mahinda Rajapaksa government while a parliamentary committee found serious allegations of corruption during his tenure with Wickramasinghe administration.  Then the most difficult issue of accountability for what happened in the last days of the war. That issue will not go away, it will remain for a long period of time   Norwegian Minister Erik Solheim While Sri Lanka Department of External Resources has been given nearly 300,000 million NOK, the government has been granted nearly 70,000 million NOK. The LTTE peace secretariat has been granted more than 18,000 million NOK and Sarvodaya and Sewalanka headed by Harsha Kumara Navaratne have received similar ammounts. The report prepared by Christian Michelsen Institute (CMI) in Bergen and the School of Oriental and African Studies (SOAS) in London on behalf of Norad has concluded that there was little Norway could do to “influence the forces that put an end to the peace process”. Milinda Moragoda Inst was granted 60,260 NOK by the Norwegian government Although the Sri Lanka's peace process has been a failure, according to the report, Norway should not be “held solely or primarily responsible” for the failure as there have been several “intermediate achievements.” Addressing a seminar in Norway upon releasing the report, the Norwegian Minister for Environment, Erik Solheim, stressed the need for Sri Lanka to find a lasting solution and the Tamil disapora to change tactics. “There is no military solution to political problems. Problem in Sri Lanka is not military. It is political and it is for the president to reach out to solve that political problem,” Mr Solheim said. He also stressed the need for Tamils within Sri Lanka, such as TNA, to take the leadership in finding a solution instead of the diaspora. “Then the most difficult issue of accountability for what happened in the last days of the war. That issue will not go away, it will remain for a long period of time,” the Norwegian minister added.

An exclusive Interview with TNA MP M.A. Sumanthiran

TamilCanadian had an exclusive interview with TNA MP M.A. Sumanthiran. The interview was conducted recently in Toronto, Canada by Sarujan Kanapathipillai.

Sarujan: Today, we have Tamil National Alliance (TNA) MP, M.A. Sumanthiran here to speak to Tamilcanadian.com. Thank you for taking the time out of your busy schedule to join us. Since the end of May 2009, this is the first TNA has come to North America in a formal capacity. What brings TNA to North America, who do you plan to meet, where do you plan to stop and what do you expect to accomplish?

M.A. Sumanthiran: Well, this visit is as a result of Assistant Secretary of State of US State Department, Robert Blake extending an invitation to us that we come to the US State Department and hold some discussion with them. We have been talking to several high officials in the US State Department for three days in Washington. We also made use of the time that we were to meet with various congressmen and senators. We are also due to meet with some officials in the United Nations in New York. So in between the two, we thought of coming to Canada as well. Tomorrow, in Ottawa, we have some meetings in the foreign ministry and also an open forum for parliamentarians in which we will explain the situation back home.

Sarujan: Since the end of the war, especially in the beginning, there were perceptions that there were divisions in the TNA. If we look at where we are two years later, TNA is stronger than ever before; did very well in the elections especially in the municipal election. Could you give us a brief insight into what has happened in TNA in the last two years? Is it a united political organization now?

M.A. Sumanthiran: The TNA is not a political party. It is an alliance of few political parties in Sri Lanka. As you would expect with any alliance, there will be always bound to be differences in opinion, more than in a single political party. Even within a single party, there would be diverse views. The TNA I must say with regard to our particular objective at this for Tamil people, has been united. Even amongst the different political parties, there is no difference in opinion as such. It is focused as to what we are ought to accomplish. That is finding an acceptable political solution by way of arrangement where the Tamil people in the northern district have greater autonomy and where we are working towards an end. Our continued electoral success and better performances increasingly due to the people reposing confidence in the way that we have been working since the general election in 2010.

Sarujan: In that regard, we hear the word colonization thrown around here and there. Could you give us a better insight into the ground situation in Sri Lanka. We hear about Buddhist temples being put in places that traditionally have had Hindu temples and other scenarios of militarization.

M.A. Sumanthiran: This problem of colonization has been there since Independence. The population in the Eastern provinces has changed drastically in character. The demography was forced to change by successive governments. Now after the military victory, the government has decided that they could use this opportunity to accelerate the process. Now there are programs in place that which in certain cases, changes overnight the demography composition of our areas. Naturally, when there is a military victory, the government is in a very strong position because there is no resistance as it were on the ground for them to implement anything . When they take over territory not available to them, it is the military that takes over the territory. There will be a transitional phase before the civil government functions can start.

So the government has utilized that space and delayed the transfer of governmental politics of civilian authorities, and kept it within the control of the military and used that time make changes on the ground. So cultural places have been destroyed, many of our places of worship have been destroyed. Buddhist places of worship, Buddhist statues have come up in areas where we don’t even have a single Buddhist civilian living. Showing that there is a heavy military presence to and that they might want to worship in a Buddhist temple. But there is no reason why they should establish those places of worship where there are civilians.

There is a program of work that the government is carrying on while they talk to the TNA and while they project talks with the TNA and various other superficial activity to the international community to convince them showing that there is a serious process of reconciliation that is going on and therefore, the international community should not disturb that by interfering in our affairs while they are held back on the ground, they are changing the ground situation. So that in a couple of years, they will present us with a fait accompli which can’t be reversed. This is a matter that we have constantly complained about. On Friday October 21, we called for an urgent debate in parliament and at that in my speech, I tabled a comprehensive document detailing all of the activities that the government is doing. Once that is placed in the parliament, we have now distributed it all over world with pictures and other various evidence to show what the government is actually doing. While telling the world that there is a process of reconciliation going on, they are doing everything that is in the opposite direction.

Sarujan: Does this situation differ in the different regions of Sri Lanka? So say, in rural areas like in Mallavi or in a more populated region like Jaffna town, do the Tamil people in different regions face different issues or are some of these common issues that you spoke of earlier?

M.A. Sumanthiran: There are common issues and also there are different issues related to the different regions. Particularly in the coastal areas, there are huge issues of migrant fishermen from the South and West being brought and settled in areas that our people lived and carried on with their work. Now these people who are brought are being given licenses to fish in certain areas, even exclusive licenses while those who have carried their work in that area for 40, 50 years are unable to get even close to the coast. In other areas, they have brought people who do some diving work. All diving equipment is given freely and they live in houses and places where our people lived. The Tamil people have been reduced to the status of displaced persons. Even there, in one particular area, one side of the road between the coast and the place is where they lived and now even that area has been fully taken over by p9oeple from outside given . Now the original house owners and landowners have been sent to the other side of the road in detention centres. This kind of thing is going on in other places like maybe in England, the military decides that there is a particular area that is strategically important to them, and they just take it over. The people who live there are not permitted to get back to those places. Sometimes, they are offered alternate places to live in if they have been resisting. In recent times, the last 7000 odd people who have been left in the camps, they have been asked to go to different places like jungle places; not the places that they have used to live in. Those people have agreed to go as life in the camps is worse to live in. This kind of thing is still going on.

Sarujan: With people coming out of the camps, there has been stories that ex-cadres, especially women cadres are not being reintegrated into society and some are rejected from society. Do you have any insight into that?

M.A. Sumanthiran: This rehabilitation process of the ex-cadres is two-faced. One is the work that they have been doing with them in the rehabilitation camps. Although their detention in the camps were illegal, there was no formal detention orders or anything like that. Yet the program of work that was implemented in the rehabilitation camps were exemplary. So I have spoken about that in the parliament and commended the commissioner general for the rehabilitation work that they have done without taking away from the fact that it was illegal detention. Nevertheless, the components of the rehabilitation program were very good. But then beyond that, when they are supposedly reintegrated into society, we have also heard about lots of mishaps and problems that I think due to previous tensions surfacing and so on. But a lot of these people who have been released from their rehabilitation camps and been sent back to their villages want to get out of the country. They think their stay is temporary because they don't want to stay there and later be picked up again. There have been some instances where they’ve been rearrested. That’s a concern that needs to be looked at fairly carefully. If the rehabilitation process is to end properly or to succeed, we need to be involved in the process a little more.

Sarujan: in recent times, the international community has been fairly vocal about not being satisfied with what the Sri Lankan government has been doing, and Canada included. Looking back, there is UN reports, there is documentaries by Channel 4, human rights watch, Amnesty International and the likes that have indicated that gross human rights violations occurred in the last phases of the war and that up to 40,000 people may have been killed. With regards to war crimes, where does TNA see this going? What would it like to do and what is on the agenda for TNA-run programs?

M.A. Sumanthiran: With the report by the expert panel appointed by the UN secretary that came out in March of this year, we were the only political party in Sri Lanka that welcomed it. We welcomed the report and we explained that many of the matters that they have described as scheduled allegations were in fact spoken by ourselves contemptuously in parliament as they happened. So it was not something new. We know that those things were actually true. We welcomed the recommendations which included various accountability processes including propane investigation and time has not changed that.

Sarujan: With regards to Diaspora, what do you think the Diaspora’s contribution has been in the past and what role do you think the Diaspora should it take?

M.A. Sumanthiran: The Diaspora has a very constructive role to play in the future and well-being of our people in Sri Lanka because of the numerical strength and also due to the commitment that the people in the Diaspora have demonstrated. Some years ago, there was a religious dignitary who came to Sri Lanka from Rwanda and after all the terrible things that had happened in Rwanda, he had a message that he gave to the Sinhalese people. He said well if you want to live peacefully in your country, you better treat your brothers, the Tamils, as equals. Because if you don’t do that, their brothers who have gone abroad will make sure you never live in peace here. I thought that it was very good advice that was given.

Sarujan: With the Diaspora, especially the second generation, does TNA see any plans or does TNA have plans to get the second generation to get them more engaged or keeping them engaged for years to come?

M.A. Sumanthiran: the TNA has a vision to engage the youth in SL and harness their energies, mobilize them into a very responsible, non-violent movement to impact the rights of the Tamil people there. In that effort, we do look, towards the Diaspora second generation to also contribute to what they can particularly in the areas of expertise that they have and if the second generation Tamil Diaspora, many people can come and live for in Sri Lanka for certain periods of time in SL, we can organize certain programs that they can empower youth in SL so that we become a vibrant, responsible and a force to reckon with in terms of our people’s political rights.

Sarujan: Some people are scared about that. There are lot of people, young and old, to come back to SL because they have been vocal in speaking out against the SL government. Do you think there is validity in being careful about returning to SL?

M.A. Sumanthiran: There may be justifiable fears in that. Each one must decide for himself or herself. They must decide that in the background of their involvement in matters here. But if all were to be scared and not be ready to do this, then we will fail. That is again, a test of their commitment. Of course, they may not be foolish and act wisely and it may be different for each person.

Sarujan: In recent times, there have been more organizations among the youth where they have been encouraging dialogue between Tamil and Sinhalese people. There have been organizations that have brought together young Sinhalese and young Tamil and have created dialogue. What do you think about that?

M.A. Sumanthiran: I would strongly support that kind of effort because that’s the kind of thing we are trying to do in Sri Lankan as well even as a political party. One of the biggest weaknesses of the Tamil political parties in the past has been that we have never spoke to the Sinhalese people directly. My sense is that if we have done that, we would’ve had a lot more Sinhalese people on our side. As it is, what happened is that their leaders who told them what the Tamil leaders stood for and it was not always accurate. We are now trying to create a situation in which we talk to Sinhalese people directly and try to convince them that we are not asking for anything outrageous. What we are asking for is just and reasonable and which is something that you find in most of the parts of the world. And that they must also support that cause if they also believe in justice and equality and all of those principles. I think that it’s a very good move to have that kind of dialogue because we believe that our demand for political autonomy is based on truth and justice and reasonableness.

Sarujan: What do you hope to see happen in the next year, next 5 years, and next 10 years? What is the vision of TNA?

M.A. Sumanthiran: The vision of the TNA is to become a potent political force that will have the confidence of our people; that will function in a very responsible manner and take forward this 60-year struggle to a point where we win back the rights of our people in terms of political autonomy, degree of self-rule in our areas.

Sarujan : Thank you for your time.

Sri Lanka: The Road to Reconciliation

AlJazeeraEnglish     11 Nov 2011 


With a final report on the civil war due, we ask if Sri Lanka's ethnic communities are more divided than ever.

Since Sri Lanka ended a long-running civil war in May 2009, the country has attracted new tourists and trade.

But critics say Sri Lanka's ethnic communities appear more divided than ever with the risk of further conflict.

Former Tamil Tiger combatants returning home from military-run rehabilitation camps are finding the military still have a pervasive presence in their lives.

Meanwhile the government has been criticised for commissioning a report into the final years of the civil war by those who say it does not have the power to investigate war crimes. The report is to be released to the government this month.

But groups like 'Sri Lanka Unites' see a positive future for the country. The youth movement promotes peace and reconciliation by travelling across Sri Lanka to bring ethnic groups together.

This edition of 101 East asks: What can remedy bitter ethnic divisions in post-war Sri Lanka?

Norway wants to learn from its experience in Sri Lanka

Press release, 11.11.2011

“We want to learn from the experience we have gained from the peace process in Sri Lanka,” said Minister of the Environment and International Development Erik Solheim. He was at the launch of the first evaluation of Norway’s peace efforts. 

An independent evaluation of Norway’s peace efforts in Sri Lanka was presented on Friday. Norway is given a pass mark for the work that was done, while at the same time a number of points are highlighted for Norway to learn from. Read the whole evaluation here.  

“We gained experience from the peace process in Sri Lanka that we can use in other places. In my view, Norway did a good job. We helped to bring about a ceasefire in 2002, which put an end to the fighting and saved lives. Having said that, we now need to consider if there was anything we could have done differently, and look at what we can learn from the experience. This evaluation will help us to do this,” commented Mr Solheim.  

Norway is one of the first countries to evaluate its own efforts in a peace process in another country. It was Mr Solheim who initiated the independent evaluation.  

“The responsibility for losing the peace lies with the parties to the conflict, just as they should have the credit for the several good years that followed the ceasefire. When the parties chose war, there was little Norway or other countries could do. The Sri Lankan authorities won the war. Now they need to win the peace,” said Mr Solheim. 

The work on the evaluation report has been headed by Gunnar Sørbø from the Chr. Michelsen Institute (CMI) and Jonathan Goodhand from the University of London’s School of Oriental and African Studies (SOAS). It tells the story of the peace process in Sri Lanka and draws lessons from the process that can be used in other peace processes. 

Read the whole evaluation on Norad’s website.

Press Officer: Communication Adviser Ragnhild H. Simenstad, mobil 917 17 459.

Pawns of Peace Evaluation of Norwegian peace efforts in Sri Lanka, 1997-2009 Report 5/2011 – Evaluation

NORAD

Pawns of Peace: Evaluation of Norwegian peace efforts in Sri Lanka, 1997-2009

Published:	November 2011 by
Commissioned by:	Norad
Carried out by:	Chr. Michelsen Institute/School of Oriental and African Studies, University of London
Series:	Evaluation reports
Pages:	208
ISBN:	978-82-7548-596-8
Tags:

• Pawns of peace_Evaluation of Norwegian peace efforts in Sri Lanka, 1997 - 2009.pdf

1351030

Free of charge

Summary

This evaluation assesses Norway’s peace efforts in Sri Lanka from 1997 to 2009. It tells the story of Norway’s engagement, assesses the effects and identifies broader implications and lessons. The analysis is based on interviews with key informants, an in-depth perusal of ministry archives in Oslo, several subsidiary studies, and a review of relevant research, secondary literature and the Sri Lankan press.

Since the end of the Cold War, Norway has shown remarkable foreign policy activism in the pursuit of peace and Sri Lanka is a prominent example of this. Norwegian efforts to bring about a negotiated settlement between successive Sri Lankan governments and the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE) spanned a twelve-year period. Apart from its role as peace facilitator, Norway was involved as a ceasefire monitor and an aid donor during this period.

The Sri Lankan peace process is largely a story of failure in terms of bringing an end to the civil war. Norway, however, cannot be held solely or primarily responsible for this ultimate failure and its involvement contributed to several intermediate achievements, including the Ceasefire Agreement, the Oslo meeting in which both sides expressed a commitment to explore a federal solution, and the signing of a joint mechanism for post-tsunami aid. The ceasefire in particular had positive impacts on the ground situation, but in the end these accomplishments proved to be ephemeral.

The peace process reproduced, rather than transformed underlying structural obstacles to conflict resolution. It failed to induce fundamental changes in the disposition of the state and anti-state formations in Sri Lanka, and to some extent it caused a further entrenchment of positions. The hurting stalemate which led to the Ceasefire Agreement (CFA), initial peace talks and a period of ‘no war-no peace’, was followed by an escalating shadow war and finally open hostilities ending in the defeat of the LTTE in May 2009.

Share: 

-------------------------------------------------------------

Could Norway have stopped the war in Sri Lanka? India wanted LTTE 'put in its place': Norway report

--------------------------------------------------------

TamilNet Editorial Board

Norway ‘LLRC’ distributes blame, washes hands of victims after ‘victory’

[Fri, 11 Nov 2011, 11:11 GMT]

A report on Norway’s failed peace process in Sri Lanka, “Pawns of Peace: Evaluation of Norwegian Peace Efforts in Sri Lanka, 1997-2009” was released in Oslo on Friday. Whether pawns of peace or ploys for genocide, Norway’s report distributed blame among all the actors. A deficiency the report finds in Norway was not its grave failure to warn the world about peace turning into genocide, but that Norway should have escaped from the scene at an earlier stage. The report admits that the peace process has only enhanced obstacles to peace now. But, even after the process facilitating internationally abetted genocide, the report subconsciously sees “victory” in the war and it now harps on “primacy of domestic politics,” to imply ways for solutions. Norway washes hands of its responsibilities to victims and the report now seeks lessons to learn for ’peacebuilding’ elsewhere. Full story >>

SL Appeal Court suspends land re-registration till Jan 19

[TamilNet, Thursday, 10 November 2011, 08:00 GMT]
The operation of the controversial notice issued by the Sri Lanka’s Commissioner General of Lands instructing the owners of lands in the North and East provinces to r-register their lands under the Land Title Registration Scheme was suspended from Wednesday till January 19, 2012 due to the stay order by the Court of Appeal. According to the notice issued by the Commissioner General of Lands land owners in the two provinces should hand their application for re-registration of lands between September 20 and November 20 this year. 

Justice W.L. Ranjith Silva of the Appeal Court issued the stay order on Wednesday when the Writ Application by the Mr.M.A.Sumanthiran, senior Attorney-at-Law and a Member of Parliament on the Tamil National Alliance ticket taken up for inquiry. The petitioner had said in his application the notice issued by the Commissioner General of Land was illegal and breached the fundamental rights of persons who owned lands in the two provinces.   The Deputy Solicitor General Ms M.Fernando who appeared for the Attorney General did not object to issue of stay order. She stated the Government is now reconsidering the notice issued by the Commissioner General of Lands. Senior Counsel K.Kanagaishwaran, Presidential Counsel appeared for the petitioner Mr.Sumanthiran.

Ministers named by MaRa avoid speaking in favor of the obnoxious business take over bill : Basil performs solo

(Lanka-e-News -10.Nov.2011, 11.00PM) The Ministers named by the President to speak on behalf of the obnoxious business take over bill which constitutes a death blow to free Enterprises in Sri Lanka , and was presented in Parliament yesterday (9) , avoided making their speeches in favor of the bill.

Ministers Anura Priyadharshana Yapa, Douglas Devananda , S B Dissanayake, Vijitha Vijayamuni Soysa, and Bandula Gunawardena were named to speak for the Govt. on the bill. Yet , all of them , at the final stage avoided speaking in favor of the obnoxious business take over bill. Though these Ministers were named by the President, none of them made their contributions . Consequently , of the 97 mins. allocated for this , 92 mins. of it was consumed by Basil Rajapakse .
Only Minister Jagath Pushpakumara who harbors a personal grudge against Daya Gamage’s Sevanagala sugar factory spoke. But that too was only for 5 mins.

Though the JHU spoke against the bill , they did not participate in the voting. Wimal Weerawansa , Douglas Devananda and Rajitha Senaratne also kept away at the time of voting.
Even at the Parliamentary lobby , the Ministers and MPs were criticizing the Govt.’s obnoxious bill , ‘ our Govt. has antagonized the University Professors, the students, garment workers and Doctors; and by trying to protect and pamper ‘kudu’ (drug) businessmen it had offended the law abiding people who revere hallowed traditions too. Finally , only the businessmen were
left , now , it had made them also its enemies.’ The senior Ministers and MPs were heard accusing the Govt. in whispers.
From the reaction of the Ministers and MPs it is very evident that this bill has been tailored by the Rajapakses to achieve their own exclusive diabolic purposes.

----------------------------------------

Petitions filed against bill postponed

Controversial “White Flag” verdict postponed - Report

(November 10, London, Sri Lanka Guardian) The head of the High Court trail at bar hearing the controversial White Flag case against Sarath Fonseka has decided to postpone the delivering of the verdict of the case, London based web site reports quoting a reliable source.

According to the report published by the Lanka News Web, “Head of the trial at bar, Judge Deepali Wijesundera has agrees to postpone the delivering of the verdict after two senior officials from the President’s Attorney general’s Department had met her and explained the situation to them.”

The two officials from the Attorney General’s Department have made the request to postpone the delivering of the verdict saying that the independence of the judiciary would be questioned locally and internationally if the verdict was delivered to coincide with the President’s birthday giving the impression of it being a birthday gift for him. The President’s real birthday is on November 17th while the verdict of the White Flag case was to be delivered on the following day (18th).

The Judge had agreed with the case put forward by the two officials from the Attorney General’s Department and has accepted their proposal.

The report further predicted, “The President has publicized his birthday to be on November 18th due to advice from his astrologers. However, the President considers 8 to be his lucky number (1+7=8). Therefore, the acceptance of nominations for every election in the country has been set giving prominence to the number 8.”

CAT: SL responses just hit the tip of the iceberg, and left many questions answered

Follow-Up Questions by Committee Experts to Sri Lankan Delegation
(November 10, Geneva, Sri Lanka Guardian) FELICE GAER, the Committee Expert who served as Rapporteur for the report of Sri Lanka, said that the delegation’s responses just hit the tip of the iceberg, and she was left with as many questions, if not more, than before.

The Human Rights Action Plan was an admirable initiative, especially as it engaged civil society, and the things presented in it were very impressive. It covered issues such as prevention, monitoring, tracking torture, impunity, special protection for women and children, restitution for victims of torture and establishing the Convention. Should it be implemented, members of civil society and victims of torture would be very pleased. However, Ms. Gaer said she looked closely at the discussion but did not find a single reference to prosecution.

The verbs used were ‘to train, strengthen, establish, create, assist’ etcetera. There were enough studies running to keep every lawyer in Sri Lanka busy. But there was no reference to investigating and prosecuting persons responsible for torture. States parties to the Convention were obliged to maintain prompt and impartial investigations whenever there were reasonable grounds to believe an act of torture had taken place – not just when a complaint had been made. Could the delegation comment on that central issue?

Would the State party publish a list of all persons in Government custody or detained? That included the 5,000 persons still missing, whose families had no idea where they were. The delegation may claim that publishing such a list was a privacy issue, but Ms. Gaer said it would clarify the whereabouts of those 5,000 persons. The delegation said that the secret detention facilities cited by Amnesty International did not exist. Would they undertake an impartial and independent investigation into allegations that secret detention facilities did exist?

There were concerns that allegations of sexual violence against women in Sri Lanka, at the end of the conflict, and done by the soldiers, had not been investigated. Furthermore in 2007, 114 members of a Sri Lankan battalion attached to the United Nations peacekeeping force in Haiti were accused of sexual exploitation of minors. One hundred and eight of those soldiers were repatriated to Sri Lanka on disciplinary grounds. The United Nations found that such acts were frequent, happened at night and those repatriated soldiers should be charged with rape. What charges were brought against those soldiers, where were the persons involved serving today, if at all?

The Committee asked about photo and video footage from the conflict depicting naked female bodies of women who had been members of the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE), which contained commentary from Sri Lankan soldiers that strongly inferred sexual violence had occurred before the women’s execution. The footage showed some bodies had mutilated sexual organs. That footage was published in a documentary by United Kingdom broadcaster Channel 4. Had any of those soldiers been prosecuted, suspended or even transferred? The Government may claim that the footage should not have been filmed in the first place, or published, but there should be an investigation.

Had there been any investigation into the so-called ‘grease devils’ cases, when in one instance over 100 young men were forcibly taken from their homes in the town of Puttalam and beaten, denied medical treatment and detained.

Yesterday the delegation said they were “with the Committee against Torture 110 per cent”, but were they 110 per cent behind their civil society when it exposed human rights violations and acts of torture?

ALESSIO BRUNI, Committee Expert who served as Co-Rapporteur for the report of Sri Lanka, said a large amount of information received concerned legal provisions, and only a small amount was about what happened in practice in the country. There was no doubt that legal and administrative measures existed to combat torture, but the reality seemed to be very different. The amount of allegations, coming from the most reliable sources, including United Nations sources, was impossible to ignore and meant that one could not say there was a real ‘zero tolerance policy’ in Sri Lanka.

Mr. Bruni said he had visited quite a few police stations and prisons in Sri Lanka, in a different capacity, so he had a visual picture of what they were. He corrected a detail about the Mount Laviniya Police Station, and said that he wanted to know what had been done.

He asked for clarification on whether statements made to the police were inadmissible in court, as if true that would be very frustrating to police who sometimes detained a person for 18 months of interrogation.

Mr. Bruni said it sounded like the rehabilitation camps were actually detention camps, and that saying former combatants were at ‘rehabilitation camps’ on a voluntary basis – as an option to standing trial – was mis-representing the term ‘voluntary’.

An Expert asked whether there was specific legislation for the treatment of stateless persons, and also what protection was given to migrant workers, particularly women working as domestic servants in the Gulf States. Those persons were often highly vulnerable and worked as indentured servants.

A Committee Expert observed that the delegation argued passionately that there was no need for a lawyer at a police station; however, a person should be able to access a lawyer from the outset to protect him or her from other forms of torture or ill-treatment.

OHCHR press release