Sri Lanka reacts to the UN- Nationalists doth protest

Banyan Mar 27th 2012,

“HILLARY CLINTON is naked! Obama is naked!” shriek the Sinhala-language graffiti across a wall in Colombo. Following their government’s lead, many Sri Lankans are reacting angrily to the passage of an American-led initiative in the UN Human Rights Council which seeks reconciliation and accountability for war crimes that are alleged to have been committed at the end of their state’s civil war against the Tamil Tigers.    

Full Story>>>

Avoid another resolution, urge Elders

 27 March, 2012

Ms Robinson says the "very mild resolution" was not an attempt to "do down Sri Lanka"

A group of world leaders formed by Nelson Mandela has urged Sri Lanka to try and avoid another showdown in the UN Human Rights Council (UNHRC) by adhering to the recent resolution adopted by the body.

Former UN High Commissioner for Human Rights Mary Robinson told BBC Sandeshaya that The Elders are very pleased that UNHRC adopted a resolution urging Sri Lanka to ensure a proper reconciliation process after decades of a brutal conflict.

Saying that the "quite mild resolution" was not a Western sponsored one, Ms Robinson insisted that it was not an attempt to "do down a country."

"We were particularly encouraged that large countries like India and Nigeria supported the resolution".

Accountability

The resolution adopted by majority vote last week in Geneva called on Sri Lanka government to implement the recommendations of Lessons Learnt and Reconciliation Commission (LLRC).

It is in the interest of Sri Lanka to accept that the majority of governments feel that Sri Lanka must do more for reconciliation   Mary Robinson

The former Irish president said The Elders also support the UN call for a proper accountability process.

"The scale of the violations alleged is really very grave by international human rights standards," added Ms Robinson.

It is advisable for Sri Lanka, she said, to adhere to the resolution in order not to "come under the radars of UNHRC once again next year," stressing that it is the responsibility of the government of any country to protect civilians, though LTTE is also responsible for gross human rights violations.

"It is in the interest of Sri Lanka to accept that the majority of governments feel that Sri Lanka must do more for reconciliation," said Ms Robinson.

Mary Robinson admitted that not only many countries that supported the resolution, India and United States among them, supported Sri Lanka government's war against the LTTE, but also provided Sri Lanka with arms.

"The elders are unequivocally worried about the extent of the arms race. Generally the supply of weapons that are causing such destructions the money that spent on weapons, the trafficking in weapons,"she said.

"The elders do feel strongly about these issues but the central factor here was the prolonged civil war and to the extent which civilians were not protected."

President’s foul mouth pushes Thonda to resign

Tuesday, 27 March 2012 

President Mahinda Rajapaksa has reprimanded Minister Arumugam Thindaman in foul language yesterday (26) afternoon and the minister had reportedly tendered his resignation following the incident.

The First Lady had appointed Rohan Wickremasinghe as the head of the Milco Company, which is under Thondaman. Although company had been on a financial decline for some time, no one raised objections due to the close relationship between Wickremasinghe and the First Lady.

Milco had paid Rs. 170 million to sugar traders by last month for sugar purchases to manufacture yoghurt. Another sum of Rs. 120 million had been spent to purchase yoghurt cups. Although trade union representatives have asked the Milco Chairman to increase production, he had rejected the requests and has maintained a 60% production level.

In this backdrop, workers at Milco have commenced union action demanding an incentive payment for the New Year. The trade union representatives have rejected a request by the Ministry Secretary for them to visit the Ministry for a discussion on the matter. All the workers have unanimously criticized the Chairman’s unilateral actions.

Minister Thondaman had removed the Milco Chairman with immediate effect after hearing the matter. The President had re-appointed the Chairman a few minutes later. Angered by it, Thondaman had telephoned the President’s confidential secretary, MP Sajin Vass Gunawardena and said the President has “done a dirty deal.” Gunawardena had immediately informed the matter to the President. Unable to contain his anger, the President had telephoned Thondaman and shouted at him in extreme foul language.

“Don’t you come up with the same antics you did with Chandrika and Ranil. Rajapaksas don’t like such actions. I have no problem even if I lose you. You better keep that in mind. Don’t try these acts with me again,” the President had shouted.

However, the President had been disturbed after hearing that Thondaman had submitted his resignation letter. The President had asked Minister Maithripala Sirisena to bring Thondaman from where ever he is. Presidential Secretary Lalith Weeratunge had asked that Thondaman be kept in the Cabinet since his resignation at this moment would have an impact internationally. It is then that the President had summoned Sirisena and begged him to find Thondaman from where ever he is.

Eknelygoda's wife latest victim of Sri Lankan intolerance

By Bob Dietz/CPJ Asia Program Coordinator

Sri Lankans are calling for a boycott of U.S. products after the U.S. sponsored the U.N. Human Rights Council resolution calling for an investigation into possible war crimes. (Reuters/Dinuka Liyanawatte)

On Thursday and Friday, we wrote about the ugly government backlash to last week'sU.N. Human Rights Council resolution calling for an investigation into Sri Lanka's alleged abuses of international humanitarian law during its war with Tamil separatists.

That campaign of intimidation continues: In the magistrate's court where Sandhya Eknelygoda has been trying to gain any information about the whereabouts of her husband, Prageeth, who disappeared on January 24, 2010, she came under harsh questioning -- observers at the court called it intentionally intimidating -- from government lawyers about her presence at the UNHRC in Geneva. Before she returned home from Switzerland, her name had been denounced in the government-controlled media as one of the government's critics -- several of whom have been denounced as "traitors."

Eknelygoda told colleagues in Colombo that Monday's entire court session was about how she went to Geneva, who funded her trip, why she betrayed her country, and how much she was paid to do that. Her lawyer objected to the line of questioning, but was overruled, she said. 

When she had returned home on Sunday from Geneva, she told reporters, "I only wanted to bring the disappearance of my husband to the notice of the international community. But, those who are allied with the government insulted me, saying I went there to betray the country," she said. You can see a video report of her statement onYouTube.

Eknelygoda and her two teenage sons have been waging a quiet but steadfast campaign to pressure the government for information about their husband and father. CPJ and four other media support groups wrote to U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon in March 2011, asking for his intervention in the case. Ban referred the issue to the U.N. High Commissioner for Human Rights and UNESCO, where it has been allowed to languish, despite pleas from Eknelygoda and her supporters.

Nor has a January 2012 ruling by Sri Lanka's Appeal Court that former Attorney General Mohan Peiris could be called in as a witness into the disappearance of Eknelygoda been acted on. In a November 2011 posting, "Sri Lanka's savage smokescreen," CPJ reported that Peiris told the Asian Human Rights Commission that Eknelygoda had taken refuge in a foreign country and that the campaign against his disappearance is a hoax, although he failed then and ever since to provide detailed information about where Eknelygoda had fled.

At the time, CPJ said that Peiris's statements "do more than point up the government's indifference to Eknelygoda's fate and the mental anguish of his wife and two sons. Peiris's statements highlight the disregard with which the government views international opinion."

Given the response in the government-controlled media following last week's Geneva vote, that indifference and disregard have moved on to outright hostility.

In the name of Freedom: Tibetan protester sets himself on fire in demonstration ahead of Chinese president's visit to India

 26 March 2012

• Protester ran 50m before collapsing in flames outside Indian Parliament
• Over 30 have performed self-immolation this year in protest at China's rule over Tibet

By CHRIS PARSONS

A Tibetan protester has been treated for severe burns after setting himself on fire in a demonstration before the Chinese president's visit to India.

The male protester sprinted for 50m through New Delhi today engulfed in flames as hundreds demonstrated against China's rule over Tibet.

Jamphel Yeshi carried out the self-immolation as he ran near the speakers at a rally near the Indian Parliament in the country's capital.

The Tibetan sustained burns on 98 per cent of his body and his condition in hospital was described as critical today.

Scroll down for video

Demo: The unnamed Tibetan man ran 50m outside the Indian parliament before collapsing today

He was on fire perhaps less than two minutes, but some of his clothing had disintegrated and his skin was mottled with black, burned patches by the time he was driven to a hospital.

Yeshi, 27, escaped from Tibet in 2006 and had been living in New Delhi for the past two years, activists said.

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2120427/Tibetan-protester-sets-demonstration-ahead-Chinese-presidents-visit-India.html#ixzz1qHeYw7MY

Lanka-US talks after UN war crime abuse vote

Colombo to resist outside pressure
AGENCE FRANCE PRESSE
COLOMBO: Sri Lanka’s foreign minister said today he would meet US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton after the adoption of a UN resolution pushing Colombo to properly investigate war crimes allegations.
Sri Lanka has rejected the resolution tabled by the United States and passed last week by the UN Human Rights Council in Geneva. 
Foreign Minister Gamini Lakshman Peiris, who had turned down an invitation to meet Clinton before the Council vote, said he planned to hold talks with her in Washington in mid-May. “We will continue to engage with the UNHRC, our bilateral partners like the US, as we have been doing in the past,” Peiris told reporters in Colombo. “However, any element of pressure will be resisted,” he added.
Rights groups have said up to 40,000 civilians were killed in the Sri Lankan military’s final offensive against Tamil Tiger rebels in 2009.
The resolution adopted in Geneva urged Sri Lanka to probe war crimes charges, implement the recommendations of a domestic inquiry into the war and seek UN help for reconciliation efforts with the minority ethnic Tamil community. The government in Colombo flayed the resolution as an attempt to interfere in the country’s internal affairs.
“We oppose it. It internationalises Sri Lanka’s situation. It takes away the sovereign rights of the people,” Peiris said.

“There will be no duress, no coercion of any kind. It’s a non-binding resolution. There are no economic sanctions,” he said. Tabling the resolution in Geneva, the US said Colombo had been given three years to hold its probe into war crimes, but “given lack of action it is appropriate” the 47-member UNHRC pushed it to do so. 

No matter the consequence we will not work according to Geneva resolution : Govt. official stance

 (Lank-e-News-26.March.2012, 11.55PM) The SL Govt. today officially announced that no matter the consequence, it will not implement the resolutions adopted at the Geneva human rights conference, and it has no need to do anything new.

Dr. G L Peiris the SL foreign Minister made this announcement. This was the Govt.’s first official announcement following the Geneva resolutions. He pointed out that the Geneva resolutions being not followed does not mean running counter .
Dr. G L Peiris elaborated as follows :
‘ Firstly . I wish to tell that our country’s policy is based on a fundamental tenet. We have taken a clear decision, and whatever the result we will not waver. We will not agree with whatever resolutions brought against our country. There is no agreement at all from our side. Several countries have clearly notified to us that they respect our stance .

These resolutions were adopted. But what is its result ? We have no reason at all to get frightened on this. Some are talking about the economic sanctions. That is not the truth. Because of the resolutions at Geneva there aren’t going to be economic sanctions. These two things are not inter related. This is not a decision of the economic Council. This will not take place that way. Therefore we need not unnecessarily fear or panic. But we labored this much because of a reasonable ground. We flatly oppose this issue being internationally focused.
Now , what is our future course of action ? That is what is most important above all others. There will be no changes in our future course of action. We will not do anything new. There is no necessity for that. We will not leave room for foreign forces to interfere in our affairs. Our policies are decided based on one tenet .That is our nation’s aspirations. It is on that tenet we work.’, Dr. Peiris declared 

India's UN 'yes' vote was a wrong move on Sri Lanka

 By KANWAL SIBAL
Many arguments can be made against our decision to vote against Sri Lanka in the Human Rights Council in Geneva, a decision highly questionable from the foreign policy point of view. 

Domestic compulsions seem to have outweighed foreign policy considerations in this case. India and the West have been at odds on how best to address the issue of human rights internationally. India shares the view that the West uses the issue to embarrass, destabilise or topple politically uncongenial governments. 

During the Cold War the Soviet Union was succesfully destabilised through the human rights basket of the Helsinki Accords. Cuba has been a favourite target year after year.

Prime Minister Manmohan Singh with Sri Lankan President 

Mahinda Rajapaksa

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/indiahome/indianews/article-2120836/Indias-UN-yes-vote-wrong-Sri-Lanka.html#ixzz1qHbAtMGD 

Minister Jeewan’s brother in law is victim of white van of abduction

(Lank-e-News-26.March.2012, 11.55PM) Western provincial Council member Sagara Senaratne , had been abducted by the white Van on the 26 th night at about 7.00, according to reports. He is the brother in law of Minister Jeevan Kumaranatunge , and this abduction had taken place in front of the Kotte Naga Vihara. The victim’s driver had made a complaint to the Mirihana police. Sagara Senaratne crossed over from the UNP purportedly to strengthen the ‘two hands’ of the Govt. He is an owner of a car sale and other businesses in the Nugegoda district.

According to unconfirmed subsequent reports , he had been confronted at Jaela area.

Why The UN Acts To Hold Sri Lanka Accountable For War Crimes

 A few incidents that have led to commentators voicing doubts on the impartiality of the UN’s role in Sri Lanka.

By J.S. Tissainayagam -

J.S. Tissainayagam

A resolution on Sri Lanka was passed in the UN Human Rights Council (UNHRC) in Geneva, Thursday. Human rights activists hailed the resolution as a hopeful first step by the international community in holding Sri Lanka accountable to war crimes. It is significant that this resolution was sponsored by the United States which became a full member of the UNHRC only in 2009.

The 27-year civil war in Sri Lanka between the Sinhala and Tamil communities ended in May 2009 with the government defeating the Tamil guerrilla group, Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE). The aftermath of the war saw increasing evidence of war crimes and crimes against humanity perpetrated by the Government and LTTE during the final months of fighting.

The resolution in Geneva calls upon the Government of Sri Lanka to implement the recommendations of the Lessons Learned and Reconciliation Commission (LLRC). The LLRC was appointed by Sri Lanka in the wake of sustained international censure for war crimes.

The LLRC’s recommendations, which were made public in December 2011, while acknowledging that civilians had been killed by the Sri Lanka military, exonerated its actions by saying that such deaths were not widespread and systematic. The LLRC, however, unambiguously accused the LTTE of war crimes. Its report recommended the Sri Lanka government appoint a domestic body to investigate these acts and punish the wrongdoers.

The recommendations of the LLRC were met with a robust pushback by the international community, Tamil groups and human rights organisations. They emphasised that only an international body, and not a domestic one, would have the stature and power to hold an impartial investigation free of government interference.

But while they called for an international investigation, Sri Lanka was reluctant to implement even the recommendations of its own commission, the LLRC. This resulted in the international community finally moving as a compromise in Geneva, a resolution which only called for implementing the LLRC recommendations and not for an international investigation.

The human rights community is reasonably satisfied that a clause in the resolution, asking the UNHRC to monitor progress in the implementation of the LLRC, will ensure compliance by Sri Lanka. But, at the same time, rights activists are cognisant that the UN’s institutional drawbacks in Sri Lanka could be an impediment in achieving this.

Rights activists are worried that the UNHRC will have to work through the UN office in Sri Lanka to monitor the progress of the implementation. Unfortunately, while the UN’s office there has a functioning human rights desk, it has been completely overshadowed by the UN’s role as a donor and implementer of economic development programmes. The question is: will the UN have the resources and more than that the will to make the necessary transformation?

If the past is anything to go by, the UN has not shown the will. For instance, just before the Sri Lankan military launched its final assault on the LTTE under whose control were at least 300,000 Tamil civilians, the Government made an announcement that all international organisations and NGOs should leave the conflict area. Despite fervent pleas by the civilian population not abandon them, the UN left without any attempt to negotiate with the government to remain. Gordon Weiss the then UN spokesman in Sri Lanka described this as “a mistake.” Leaving without attempting to negotiate runs contrary to the UN’s usual practice as was amply demonstrated in Darfur.

Another controversy was the UN’s refusal to release casualty figures in the final months of fighting in Sri Lanka. The UN initially maintained “we do not count bodies.” However, the Inner City Press said on March, 18, 2009 that leaked documents revealed the UN’s Office of the Coordinator of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA) did have the numbers, which were deliberately withheld. The Inner City Press observed that “unlike in other conflicts from Darfur to Gaza, the UN withheld the Sri Lanka figures, in effect protecting the Sri Lankan government.”

These are but a few incidents that have led to commentators voicing doubts on the impartiality of the UN’s role in Sri Lanka.

If so, how are the gains in Geneva to be preserved? One way out might be for the UN’s Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights and the Department of Political Affairs to play more pivotal roles in Sri Lanka than they do today. If the UN is to “take effective collective measures for the prevention and removal of threats to the peace” as is mandated in its Charter, its headquarters needs to work more closely with its Sri Lanka mission.

This could be accomplished is by the countries that voted in favour of the Geneva resolution taking the lead in making the UN strengthen its political and human rights mandates in its Sri Lanka mission. Negligence in this task might find Sri Lanka slipping out of its obligations.

J. S. Tissainayagam is a Weatherhead Fellow in International Affairs at Harvard University. He was Nieman Fellow in Journalism (2010-11) also at Harvard. Previously, he worked for a number of English national newspapers in Sri Lanka. ( Global Post)

UNHRC resolution anti-government, but pro-people, says Sri Lankan MP

March 26, 2012 B. KOLAPPAN
Rejecting the notion that the Sinhalese community as a whole would harden its stand as a result of the resolution against Sri Lanka in the United Nations Human Rights Council (UNHRC), the country's Tamil Nationalist Alliance MP M.A. Sumanthiran on Sunday said that on the contrary, there was realisation that the resolution had come about because of the Sri Lankan Government's failure to do the right things at the right time.

“There is realisation that grave injustice has been done to the Tamil people and it is coming back to them. We keep saying it is a good resolution for the whole country. It is anti-government, but pro-people. Regardless of ethnicity it will help all our people. It is an indictment of the government for it failure to live up to its promise,” Mr. Sumanthiran told The Hindu.

While expressing happiness over India's decision to support the resolution, he said he appreciated that it was a difficult decision for India, considering the bilateral relations between the two countries. “But we are happy that India took a decision. Because it is only now the Sri Lankan government will realise that giving assurances gives it a duty to keep them. It will have some positive effect,” Mr. Sumanthiran said.

He said the TNA MPs were invited by the U.S. State department in October last year to discuss the issue and in January this year he went again to hold talks. “The resolution was the result of those efforts. The U.S. redefined its policy towards Sri Lanka in this period. It decided that the Sri Lankan government is not going to do anything unless some pressure is exercised,” he said.

Responding to a question whether such external pressure would not have adverse consequences, he said Tamil people could not continue to live as slaves or second-class citizens in their own country. Equality and respect for human rights had international standards. “The Sri Lankan government must discharge its accountability by agreeing to an independent investigation into allegations of war crimes and crimes against humanity,” he said.

Asked about the talks between the Sri Lankan Government and the TNA, he said the onus on the government is to restart the talks and take it to a conclusion. Urging the Sri Lankan government to quickly resettle the people, demilitarise the area and grant meaningful devolution of powers, he said resettlement must incorporate housing and creation of livelihood.

Repugnant behaviour of Sri Lanka threat to international peace?

 by Rajasingham Jayadevan

( March 26, 2012, London, Sri Lanka Guardian) The true character of Sri Lanka is well exposed in the international arena following the defeat of the LTTE.

The government that believed, it will have overwhelming support from the international community for defeating the LTTE outright in 2009, has become a victim of its own success, due to its inwardly agenda that has put the island nation in a quandary and on the international agenda.

Innocent under-aged Bikkus (Buddhist priests) protest against the West

If this is what the behaviour of Sri Lanka conducting its affairs in the international level, one should revisit the historical events to corroborate the facts of how it treated its national minority (Tamils) that created the very LTTE which was eliminated with international support.

Instead of embracing the Tamils as its national minority with due regard, the post independence Sri Lanka treated them with absolute contempt and systematically purged them in various ways to make them a manageable minority - a process that is continuing even after the defeat of the LTTE.

 Read More »