Sri Lanka to hand over post-war reconciliation report to UN
COLOMBO, July 23 (Xinhua) -- Sri Lanka will hand over its report on post-war reconciliation to the United Nations Monday as part of the Universal Periodic Review, an official said here.

The Sri Lankan government has compiled a report giving detailed progress on the post-war reconciliation and rehabilitation measures undertaken since 2009, which will include implementation of a key accountability report, Human Rights Minister Mahinda Samarasinghe said.

He told media that the report, which has already been handed over to President Mahinda Rajapaksa for his signature, will be emailed to Sri Lanka's Permanent Mission in Geneva on Monday.

"This is the start of the very transparent process. The Sri Lankan government is pleased to have the opportunity to showcase steps it has taken to bring about peace and development since the end of the war. This report has been compiled over the past five to six months involving all the ministries and departments," he noted.

Sri Lanka's review will be held on 1 November. The United Nations Human Rights Council has appointed India, Benin and Spain to the troika that is scheduled to review Sri Lanka.

All three countries voted in support of the UN resolution on Sri Lanka, sponsored by the United States and adapted by the UN Human Rights Council at the 19th sessions of United Nations Human Rights Council in Geneva in March.

INTER PRESS SERVICE

News Agency

Child Rape on the Rise in Sri Lanka

By Feizal Samath

COLOMBO, Jul 23 2012 (IPS) - A spate of child rape cases in Sri Lanka has angered child rights activists and moved the government to consider tightening the relevant laws and making the offence punishable with the death sentence.

A government statement released in parliament in May said that of the 1,450 female rape cases reported in 2011, child rape accounted for 1,169, alerting authorities and activists to a rising trend.

Earlier this month, police said in a statement that over 700 complaints of rape or abuse of children were filed in the first half of the year, and that, on average, at least four cases were  being reported daily.

But, according to the National Child Protection Authority (NCPA), the situation is far worse than what is being reported to the police and the authority estimates that over 20,000 cases of child abuse may occurred in the first half of this year.

Among the reasons for such abuse, as reported in the NCPA statement, are insecurity of children, popularity of mobile phones with internet facilities among the youth, access to pornography, increasing substance abuse and lack of sex education.

An October 2011 study of child abuse in Sri Lanka’s north-central region – where unsettled conditions prevail following the end of three decades of armed separatist militancy in 2009 –  showed that 30 percent of the cases were of female minors (below 15 years) having consensual sex with a male partner.

The balance 70 percent of cases were attributed to the “strength, power and dominance of perpetrators who could be relatives, teachers or religious dignitaries,” a senior prosecutor at the attorney general’s office told IPS asking not to be named. “While we do our part, society also needs to take a serious look at this issue,” he said.

The trend of powerful people preying on minor girls is not confined to the north and east of the island country. Recently, a 13-year-old girl identified four men, including a local   politician belonging to the ruling United People’s Freedom Alliance (UPFA), of  gang raping her.

Full Story>>>

This Is How Racism Takes Root

By Joseph Harker -July 23, 2012

Joseph Harker

The different ways the media covered two cases of men grooming children for sex show how shockingly easy it is to demonise a whole community

By now surely everyone knows the case of the eight men convicted of picking vulnerable underage girls off the streets, then plying them with drink and drugs before having sex with them. A shocking story. But maybe you haven’t heard. Because these sex assaults did not take place in Rochdale, where a similar story led the news for days in May, but in Derby earlier this month. Fifteen girls aged 13 to 15, many of them in care, were preyed on by the men. And though they were not working as a gang, their methods were similar – often targeting children in care and luring them with, among other things, cuddly toys. But this time, of the eight predators, seven were white, not Asian. And the story made barely a ripple in the national media.

Of the daily papers, only the Guardian and the Times reported it. There was no commentary anywhere on how these crimes shine a light on British culture, or how middle-aged white men have to confront the deep flaws in their religious and ethnic identity. Yet that’s exactly what played out following the conviction in May of the “Asian sex gang” in Rochdale, which made the front page of every national newspaper. Though analysis of the case focused on how big a factor was race, religion and culture, the unreported story is of how politicians and the media have created a new racial scapegoat. In fact, if anyone wants to study how racism begins, and creeps into the consciousness of an entire nation, they need look no further.

Five of the eight men convicted of child sex abuse in Derby: Mark Adaoui, John Shaw, Stefan Godfrey, Anthony Lambert and Ijaz Ahmed. Photograph: Caters News Agency

Imagine you were living in a town of 20,000 people – the size of, say, Penzance in Cornwall – and one day it was discovered that one of its residents had been involved in a sex crime. Would it be reasonable to say that the whole town had a cultural problem, that it needed to address the scourge – that anyone not doing so was part of a “conspiracy of silence”? But the intense interest in the Rochdale story arose from a January 2011 Times “scoop” that was based on the conviction of at most 50 British Pakistanis out of a total UK population of 1.2 million, just one in 24,000: one person per Penzance.                           Read More

A’sangaree faults India for backing UNHCR resolution

Makes open appeal to Indian political parties

July 21, 2012, 7:50 pm 

By Shamindra Ferdinando

TULF General Secretary, V. Anandasangaree has faulted India for throwing its weight behind a US-sponsored resolution at the 19th sessions of the United Nations Human Rights Council (UNHRC) in Geneva last February.

The outspoken politician sharply differed with pro-LTTE Tamil Diaspora groups, led by UK-based Global Tamil Forum (GTF) and one-time LTTE mouthpiece, Tamil National Alliance (TNA) over Indian action. Both Tamil Diaspora and the TNA are of the opinion that only international pressure could compel GoSL to address the grievances of the Tamil speaking people in Sri Lanka.

In an open appeal to Indian political parties, the veteran politician asserted that the Indian move has had a devastating impact on Indo-Lanka relations.

Anandasangaree, who had been strongly critical of the failure on the part of President Mahinda Rajapaksa to address Tamils’ grievances even after the conclusion of the conflict in May 2009, warned that anti-Sri Lanka actions by Tamil Nadu politicians could be counter-productive and detrimental to the Tamil cause.

The TULF leader said that their cause would have been better served if India remained neutral in Geneva and left the US led effort to take its own course.

The former MP said that the US resolution would have been passed even without India’s support, though senior GoSL officials told The Sunday Island the success of the anti-Sri Lanka move entirely depend on India.

Had India refrained from voting for the resolution, the outcome of the vote could have been different, a senior official involved in the decision making process said.    

India is among 24 countries that voted against Sri Lanka at the Geneva session. The resolution is aimed to promote reconciliation and accountability.

"One has to weigh pros and cons. What we did was in line with our stand on Sri Lanka. We do not want to infringe on the sovereignty of Sri Lanka but concerns should be expressed so that Tamil people can get justice and lead a life of dignity," India Prime Minister Manmohan Singh was quoted as having said in a statement which strongly justified New Delhi’s action.

Fifteen countries including China and Russia backed Sri Lanka, which had rejected the resolution, saying it unduly interfered in the country’s domestic affairs and could hinder its reconciliation process. Eight countries abstained from voting.

Anandasangaree warned that Tamil Nadu’s hostility towards Sri Lanka could be exploited by the Chinese whose influence in Sri Lanka was growing rapidly.

Referring to recent protests in Tamil Nadu against Sri Lanka Air Force (SLAF) personnel receiving training there, the TULF leader emphasized that as long as China remained Sri Lanka’s ally, even large scale training projects wouldn’t be an issue.

Anandasangaree stressed that India and Tamil Nadu should be mindful of what was going on Sri Lanka and their actions could further undermine cause of the Sri Lankan Tamils.

Accusing China of helping the GoSL to saturate the Northern Province with military bases in the wake of the LTTE annihilation, the TULF leader warned the failure on the part of India to adopt a different approach without further delay could cause an irrevocable damage to Sri Lankan Tamils.

He said it was most important to set up at least an interim administration for the Northern Province to look after those still experiencing difficulties.

He accused the government of failing in its duty to provide at least basic requirements of the Tamil speaking people even three years after the conclusion of the conflict. Alleging that the vast majority of people living in the post-war Vanni were starving, the former MP said that their only option was seeking assistance from India. Anandasangaree pleaded with Tamil Nadu not to be hostile towards Sri Lanka as deterioration of bilateral relations would only make it difficult for Sri Lankan Tamils to obtain assistance from the South Indian state.

Handling disasters: The man-made disaster of July 1983 (Part 2)

Groundviews

Bradman Weerakoon 20 Jul, 2012

Photograph by Chandragupta Amarasinghe, courtesy Thuppahi’s Blog

[Editors note: Continued from Part 1, which you can read here. The author was at the time of the 1983 anti-Tamil pogrom Secretary to the Prime Minister and Commissioner-General of Essential Services from July 1983 to April 1984.]

Prioritization of Needs

Taking stock

An early activity of the CGES management team was the prioritization of displaced persons ‘needs’. This was based on an assessment of personal requests, complaints and, sometimes, fervent pleas by the ‘displaced’, now virtual refugees, in the hastily set –up welfare centres.

The senior management Team[1], consisted mainly of the eight Deputy Commisioners supplemented by other staff members as required. It met daily with the CGES during the first five days and then weekly on a regular basis to assess and compile lists of needs. Numerous telephone calls with Officers – in – Charge of the Centres (which were set up in the outstations too as the disturbances spread outward from Colombo to other main towns with mixed populations) and discussion with NGO’s active in the field (prominent among them Sarvodaya, the Sri Lanka Red Cross and Saukyadana) highlighted and sharpened specific urgent needs. Information supplied by the News media which quickly swung into action and the frequent Press meetings set up by the Press Relations and NGOO Director (Wilfred Jayasuriya) helped in the inevitably rough and ready assessment of needs which was all the circumstances permitted. Later on, a structured detailed survey of family and individual members needs – education, employment, etc was carried out with the help of voluntary observers (mainly retirees and University students). But in the very early stages of displacement the stock-taking was based mostly on verbal information and on an adhoc basis.

Out of this welter of information it was clear that what the involuntarily displaced (100,000 in Colombo Municipality area alone, and growing in numbers outside) chiefly needed was the assurance of personal safety for the family, information about, and where appropriate, reunion with those family members who had presumably fled to other points of safety, clothing – since many had escaped from their homes with barely the clothes on their backs- and urgent medical attention, (very often burns), for those who had suffered injury during the attacks. Shelter of some kind, food and water and immediate additional sanitation at the temporary centres were also high in priority. Evacuation, back to Jaffna, Trincomalee, Batticaloa, the Vanni and Mannar also figured high especially where the displaced had been living as weekly ‘boarders’ in the city. Concern for material belongings – houses, business establishments, vehicles, jewellery, household equipment and books/documents which had been lost to arson and pillage took, not unexpectedly, a secondary place and was therefore left to be dealt with by the CGES subsequently. Security and ‘relief and rehabilitation’ of the person, being of primary interest. However the question of personal belongings and hard – earned livelihoods and businesses ranging from the ‘corner plantain – boutique’, the roadside cobbler, to hundreds of small and medium sized shops and large industrial units which had also been looted and set on fire, could not be long delayed. The issue of material belongings lost and destroyed assumed great importance as the extent of damage inflicted became known. It was clear that the CGES could not, with its given powers, address this need as well. The Cabinet was advised to establish a separate institution to manage affected property, businesses and industry and Emergency Regulations were promulgated under the Public Security Ordinance to handle the many issues which had arisen in this area. I have dealt with this under the sub-heading REPPIA – (Rehabilitation of Persons, Property and Industries Authority.)

Family Reunion Continue reading »

The Living Seeds of Black July 

The long Lankan tragedy is a result of the outstanding success of such appeals, and the inability of moderates of all ethnicities and religions to resist them. Black July was the most horrendous symbol of that monumental failure.

by Tisaranee Gunasekara

“Nations are made not of oak and rock but of men, and, as the men are, so will the nations be”

Milton Meyer

(They Thought They Were Free: The Germans – 1933-1945).

(22 July, 2012, Colombo, Sri Lanka Guardian) A concoction of toxic myths and noxious perceptions created the soil from which the horror that was Black July sprang into bloody life 29 years ago.

There was the myth that Sinhala-Buddhists are the sole owners of Sri Lanka. There was the myth that ethno-religious minorities are aliens, descending from invaders.

There was the perception that Tamils, Muslims and Christians are essentially unreliable and untrustworthy, that they are a perennial ‘fifth column’ which must be kept on a very short leash.

The confluence of these myths and perceptions created a ‘Clash of Civilisations’ version of history which reduced the past, present and future of the island to a long war between its majority-owners and minority-interlopers.

People follow the history they believe in.

When history becomes an ‘us vs. them’ Manichean drama, it renders unacceptable, ipso facto, any demand by any minority for justice and equality, because non-owners of a country do not have any inalienable rights. It also prevents the majority from accepting the possibility of minority grievances, let alone understanding them. And it labels any attempt to resolve minority issues as rank betrayal.

Sinhalese and Tamils coexisted in this small island for millennia. But the Mahawamsa-inspired history focuses on the shorter episodes of conflict with such virulent single-mindedness, that it effectively effaces the far longer periods of mutually tolerant coexistence. It is this history as ‘Sinhala vs. Tamil war for Lebensraum’ children learn in schools, and in homes, a history filled with imagery of carnage and destruction, glorified in the name of patriotism.

The history of Sinhala-Muslim relations is presented in an even more distorted form. Islam was brought to Lanka by traders and the island never faced a Muslim invasion.

The British policy of divide-and-rule was applied to Sinhalese and Tamils and not to Muslims. And yet, the first racial riot in Ceylon targeted Muslims who were not demanding a separate state or even political rights – proof positive that the ‘us vs. them’ version of history can cause outbursts of bloody intolerance, even without the excuse of separatism.

This Manichean version of history led to ‘Sinhala Only’; it was, is and will be a mammoth politico-psychological obstacle to a political solution to the ethnic problem.

It also provides an unfailing-justification for majority assaults on any minority seen as too assertive or successful, too demanding or intrusive, by covering such outbursts with the cloak of patriotism – as in July 1983.

The perpetrators of Black July were not just thugs, or UNPers. Ordinary law-abiding citizens of all political hues and none actively participated in the horror while a far greater number of ordinary, law-abiding citizens looked on with approbation or indifference or (occasionally) shame. The active participants could not have destroyed, burnt and killed, and the approving spectators nodded assent, day in day out, for almost a fortnight, if they were not fortified by the belief that they were warriors in a just war.

Without the amoral strength and irrational justification provided by the belief that the alien Tamils must be stopped from destroying Sinhala Sri Lanka, the fires of Black July may not have burnt so infernally and for so long. Or left behind, not ashes of shameful repentance, but embers of angry aggressiveness.

As the Mahawamsa clearly implies an atrocity becomes a virtue when committed against ‘unbelievers’ for the protection of the true faith and its sole refuge.

This mindset was at the centre of many an abomination, not just 29 years ago, but even in the recent past; such as the incarceration of around 300,000 civilian Tamils in open prison camps masquerading as ‘welfare villages’. Instead of encouraging the innate kindness and generosity of ordinary Sinhalese to come to the fore, instead of allowing ordinary Sinhalese to feel compassion for the plight of ordinary Tamils and to reach out to them in solidarity and fellow-feeling, the South was told that Tamils in their camps were safe, happy and lacked for nothing (plus that no civilian Tamil died in the war). So the Sinhalese celebrated; and descended on the North en masse as pilgrims and pleasure seekers, blind to the destruction and destitution around them, while the Tamils festered in terrified and resentful silence in shattered homes and barbed-wire camps.

The same Manichean mindset which led post-independent Lanka into a brutal war is now poisoning the peace and driving the search for other enemies to replace the beaten Tamils.

And in the attempts to stereotype and demonise the Muslims, one can hear the distant echoes of the words which enabled Black July.

They are almost the same words used against Tamils in the years preceding Black July: unpatriotic, encroaching, taking our land and dominating our economy…

Religious-racism is as blindly inane as ethnic-racism. In the emerging attempts to subsume all Muslims under the fundamentalist-hijab, the courageous voices of moderate Muslims are lost – such as the article by a Lankan born Muslim scholar, Dr. Ameer Ali (http://www.colombotelegraph.com/index.php/prophet-not-perfect-says-sri-lankan-islamic-scholar/). Just as Black July and its unrepentant aftermath enabled Vellupillai Pirapaharan to decimate Tamil moderates and dominate Tamil polity and society, attacks on Muslims by Sinhala-Buddhist extremists will strengthen fundamentalist Muslims at the expense of moderates, to the detriment of all concerned, not least the Muslims themselves.

An Alliance of Moderates

As Hannah Arendt points out in ‘The Banality of Evil’ there is a fundamental similarity between opposing fundamentalisms. Ethnic-racists refuse to share power with other ethnicities. Religious-racists agree that life and society should be reordered in accordance with religion, the only difference being whose religion. Both oppose the secular humanist values of Radical Enlightenment, including universal human rights and pluralist democracy.

Intolerance and extremism are not the sole properties of one race or one religion. The ‘reflex of despair’ (Hobsbawm) generated by violence and injustice encourages the victims to become violent and unjust. Sinhala intolerance and extremism gave birth to Tamil intolerance and extremism personified by the Tigers, who subjected the Tamils to a worse tyranny than ever by the Sinhalese and followed a policy of religious cleansing vis-à-vis the Muslims. There are reports of fundamentalist Islamic groups violently attacking other Muslims whose interpretation of the Koran is different from theirs. In the recent past we witnessed two incidents of Buddhist-on-Buddhist violence.

Unless these internal demons can be defeated, Sinhalese, Tamils, Muslims, Buddhists and Christians will continue to be the victims of their own aggression, in a ‘war of all against all’.

Politicians often appeal to the demon of intolerance in the national-psyche, in the hope of harnessing its power.

The long Lankan tragedy is a result of the outstanding success of such appeals, and the inability of moderates of all ethnicities and religions to resist them. Black July was the most horrendous symbol of that monumental failure.

Can the moderates do better this time?

Will Sinhala-Buddhists learn that Sri Lanka can be saved from disintegration only if the polity accepts pluralist democracy (including devolution) and society is cleansed of the ethno-religious racist seeds which gave birth to Black July?

Calls mount to investigate secret Swiss accounts

By Feizal Samath   Sunday, July 22, 2012

View(s): 1598

Opposition politicians and civil society activists are calling for a full investigation into secretive Swiss bank accounts worth more than US$ 85 million (Rs. 11.2 b) held by wealthy Sri Lankans and institutions. This follows the Sunday Times’ July 1 exclusive exposure of this issue.
UNP Parliamentarian Lakshman Kiriella, who revealed in Parliament on Tuesday that some 400 prominent members of the government had such accounts, told the Sunday Times later that there were many more. “But there are also some legitimate (non-government) investors holding these accounts,” he said, declining to reveal the�source of his information.

“Why can’t the government (authorities) probe this,” he asked.The issue has been the focus of discussion at the high echelons of civil society with links to grassroots groups, saying a probe is a must and widely praising the Sunday Times for its efforts.

The Sunday Times on July 1 blew the lid on an issue that has eluded many governments over the past two to three decades on the number of Sri Lankans who have stashed ill-gotten money in Swiss banks whose secrecy clauses about the identity of account holders have encouraged millions of laundered money to be deposited.

Nihal Sri Ameresekere, Sri Lanka’s foremost anti-corruption buster whose efforts have been recognised by the United Nations, told the Sunday Times the amount disclosed (about 85 million US dollars or Swiss Francs in 2011. A Swiss franc is marginally higher than a dollar) is just the tip of the iceberg.

“There are many businessmen who operate accounts in different tax havens like Gibraltar (and the Cayman Islands) and probably transfer this money to Swiss accounts. When that happens, the deposits don’t come under the Sri Lanka country category,” he said.
The Sunday Times report said that data of account holders and their country of origin were disclosed by the Swiss National Bank (Central Bank) for the year 2011 but no individual details were revealed in its publicly accessible website. The website details which was included in the Sunday Times report has led to many accessing it for more information, including those who have accounts, fearing they would be exposed, it is reliably understood.

“This matter is being discussed widely in many sections of civil society particularly since the large amount of deposits in 2005 was the time many large-scale projects began without any transparency or disclosure about amounts spent,” a top civil society activist, who declined to be named, said.

“Everyone wants to ascertain who has money in the secret accounts and it’s the government’s obligation to respond.” More than $180 million was recorded in 2005 belonging to Sri Lankan account holders, the highest amount in a single year for the 10 years (2002-2011) disclosed by the Swiss National Bank.

Mr. Kiriella said no tenders were called for the Hambantota port project for example and there have been several projects involving millions of rupees during this period. He said, during a discussion on Wednesday on increasing allowances to the Bribery Commissioners Department, he had asked why the Commissioners were silent on this issue.

“Why can’t they go to the Supreme Court and seek an order that can be executed overseas to ascertain the identity of those holding accounts? It is an obligation now on countries under the UN Convention of Anti-Corruption,” he told the Sunday Times.

Asked to comment, Central Bank Governor Ajith Nivard Cabraal, under whose purview the Financial Intelligence Unit (FIU) comes, said they would (only) get involved if banks reported suspicious (overseas) transactions. “And so far nothing (of that sort) has happened,” he said.
But Mr. Ameresekere said that FIUs have been set up under the UN Convention and are pro-active in tracking terrorist funding and money laundering. “Sri Lanka was the second country to sign the convention in 2004,” he said. Under the Convention, an International Association of Anti-Corruption Authorities (IAACA) exists and under that law enforcement authorities like the Attorney General, Police or Bribery Commission can seek the assistance of countries to trace any laundered money.

“But the problem is that specific details must be given like the identity of these individuals otherwise it’s difficult to get this information,” Mr. Ameresekere, whose expertise has been often sought by the IAACA, said.He said the Convention has specific provisions relating to politicians, their families and close associates who are listed as ‘should be under the highest degree of scrutiny’.

But he said many individuals stash their money through complex corporate structures in different countries with trustees in charge and the actual owners hidden in the background. “These structures make it difficult to trace the origins of these accounts,” he noted.

Sri Lanka: Ethnic Conflict, LTTE And Future

By Dr A. R. M. Imtiyaz

It is now crystal clear that the Sinhala leaders will never put forward a just resolution to the Tamil national question. Therefore, we are not prepared to place our trust in the impossible and walk along the same old futile path…. We therefore ask the international community and the countries of the world that respect justice to recognize our freedom struggle.” This is the key sections of the annual Heroes’ Day statement delivered by the slain leader of the disabled Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE), V. Pirapaharan.
Serious Sri Lanka watchers would agree that such a statement represents not only the Tamil disappointments and distrust, but also it effectively exposes the duplicity of five decades old southern Sinhalese politics, which categorically refused to do meaningful political business with the Tamil leaders who represent the North and East Tamils.  Moderates The Tamil Tigers, who mirrored the Sinhala political establishment in its dealing with dissent and pluralism, unquestionably are the deadly elements of the Sri Lanka society. Whether the Tamil Tigers, for that matter, violent Tamil nationalists are freedom fighters as they claim themselves or deadly terrorists as the Sri Lanka governments describe, history will answer it. My point here is that the birth of Tamil Tiger movement had roots in Sri Lanka’s history and its anti-Tamil agendas. It is important to point that there was not an overnight decision among the ordinary Tamils to approve the agendas of the Tamil Tigers: the failure of Sri Lankan polity to meet the demands of the Tamil moderates was a key foundation for the origin of the Tamil extremism in Sri Lanka. Instead of listening to the Tamil leaders and accommodating their reasonable demands, the Sinhalese ruling leaders of the time assaulted and stoned the Tamils and their leaders, and even hired the Sinhalese to become butchers to kill innocent Tamils and moderate leaders. One needs to realize that successive governments since 1956 controlled by the Sinhalese miserably failed to engage the Tamil moderates such as the Federal Party (FP).
The FP sought a comprehensive solution without jeopardizing the unity of Sri Lanka. However, Sinhalese collective, competitive chauvinism turned a blind eye to the Tamil moderates. Sadly, the choice of the Sinhala political class to use violence, effectively scratched the Tamil trust in the political system and encouraged some Tamils to adopt violence. Mr. Ranil Wickremasinghe, a former Premier of Sri Lanka during his visit to the United States echoed this truth. He pointed out that “the Tamils tried peaceful protests which soon degenerated into violence. With the underlying grievances being unattended the stage was set for terrorist groups to emerge (“Our Approach for a Better Tomorrow Free from Terrorism,” Daily News, July 25, 2002.) This helps us to understand the birth of Tamil violent movements, particularly the Tamil Tigers in the end of 1970. The Sinhalese ruling leaders, however, did not freeze their election-oriented ethnic outbidding policies. They incessantly formulated emotional policies to win the sympathy of the Sinhalese. A significant portion of Tamils in the North even after the end of the brutal war, think that they are being treated unfairly and their lands are being occupied by the Sinhala army. Colombo’s steady failure to engage Tamils and the Moors in the so-called post-war period to negotiate what political scientists call ‘consociational democracy’ to ease ethnic tensions explains Sinhala political class’ political goals.
What is more ironic is that in Sri Lanka, even after 30 years of conflict, after victimizing thousands of Sri Lankans, mostly Tamils, the Sinhalese political class is still refusing to recognize that minorities, including the Moors, whose political leaders actively support Sinhala political class, have legitimate grievances that require reasonable political solution. In fact, the Sinala political class is deliberately refusing to understand the problems of the Tamils and Moors; because they do not want to challenge the kind of political culture they created to outbid their opponents. To consolidate this narrow political culture, they utilize 5th century Mahavamsa, which plays a key role in the formation of Sinhala elite mobilization. According to Mahavamsa, Sinhalese people are the preservers of Buddhism and the entire island is the sacred home of the Sinhalese and of Buddhism.
Separation may not be a desirable solution for the Sri Lanka’s ethnic civil war which killed more than 100,000 people of the island’s 21 millions. In other words, separation may trigger further instability. But when a particular community is continuously being denied their rights and share, and become prisoners of the majority/dominant community, then there must be a solution to arrest unhealthy political situation and to give justice to the marginalized. However, desire for a partition could be challenged if the ruling elites show real willingness to think and act beyond the ethnic emotions, and commitments to share the powers with the minorities. That is to say, their must be effective power sharing mechanisms both at the center and the regions. This would more likely undermine the agendas of the Tamil nationalists, provided there is a domestic and international political willingness to implement the agreement.
Moreover, it is politically incorrect to demand a particular community to forcefully cohabit with the majority. Also, when there is no space for political accommodation and citizenship for the minorities who claim geographical domination in a certain areas of the country, separation is highly likely. Like Pirapakaran, there are many Tamils, who think that “uncompromising stance of Sinhala chauvinism” would never deliver justice to the Tamils.
Therefore, when the Tamils say “the uncompromising stance of Sinhala chauvinism has left us with no other option but an independent state for the people of Tamil Eelam,” it is highly demonstrating their frustration both with the impartial delivery of democratic system and the Sinhalese ruling elites.
The best alternative to the partition is, as above mentioned, serious political formulas which would go beyond the failed unitary state structure. Such a political formulas may  probably provide a political space to cohabit with other groups, while maintaining their own identity and values. The basic logic of unity is acceptance. When we prepare to accept choices made by others regardless of their ethnic/religious identity, we not only win their trust, but also their loyalty to the common goals. On the other hand, polity may trigger violence and instability when we shove our preferences on others. Unity and peace among the different groups, by and large, occur when there is a sprit for respect, self-determination, and freedom, in other words, tensions between the different ethnic groups can disappear when the state offers the space for the minorities to build their lost trust, and to uphold their citizenship through the political autonomy.
Sinhala political class needs to engage Tamil leaders as well as Moors to seek justice. Absence of justice often triggers tensions and rivalry. A political solution to the conflict is one way to gain justice. Ethnic leaders can emerge in absence of justice, decent peace and opportunities. Colombo should not forget the roots of the conflict that gave birth to the LTTE. Elections are part of healthy democracy, but what dignifies democracy is culture of pluralism and justice in which masses would enjoy true political, social and cultural autonomy.
(Dr.  A. R. M. Imtiyaz’ research and teaching are mainly focused on ethnic politics. He has published widely in peer-reviewed international journals. He currently teaches at the Asian Studies/Department of Political Science, Temple University, Philadelphia, USA.)

Sri Lanka lawyers boycott courts

20 July 2012






Court proceedings were disrupted across the country

 

Lawyers and judges across Sri Lanka have boycotted legal proceedings because of alleged political interference with the judiciary.

They accused a Muslim government minister of threatening a magistrate in the north-western town of Mannar.

The judge recently ruled in a dispute involving Muslims and Catholic Tamil fishing communities. Muslims allege the decision favoured the Catholic Tamils.

It is not clear if the boycott will continue when courts reopen on Monday.

On Wednesday, a group of Muslim protesters were blamed for trying to attack the court in Mannar, prompting police to fire tear gas and rescue the magistrate.

"Courts across the court did not function today because of the protest," Judges' Association secretary Pradeep Jayatillake told AFP news agency. "We endorse the move by the Bar Association to stay away from hearings today."

He alleged there had been "direct interference" with the judiciary in Mannar.

There was no immediate reaction from the government.

Permitted profanity and patriotic spiritualism
Sunday 22 July 2012

Defence secretary said in an interview “No, in fact I clarified that in the conversation with her over the phone - the very same conversation. All I said was that people are so angry with persons like her who have worked against the war effort and the country, that if she attends a function, 90% of the people would be against her, and that I would be able to point this out to her at such a function. I said such people who are angry  may want to kill her - I never said that I was going to kill her; there was no threat by  me except the lawful threat to sue.” Ok. Here is a sensible man telling a journalist, the real situation in the society as he understands. In fact many of my friends and relations used to tell me that I should be careful in defending the right of self determination of Tamils, as many Sinhala racists are wild and may kill me if they get an opportunity. Of course this was true and I was shot down and with a near fatal injury, I struggled for several weeks to survive. Obviously warning a person, with or without love and affection, of dangers that the person could face is praise worthy if it was done in a personal conversation not within an argument. In an argument especially when the person involved is a champion against the liberation of the Tamil nation it will be some thing different. In fact in the period 88/ 89 if any JVP leader warned me about dangers to my life, I would have certainly assumed that, as a threat. I am sure at that stage, if I had warned a JVP leader about the dangers he is facing, he would have assumed that it is a part of a threat.

Against the war effort

Gotabhaya says that people are so angry with persons like her who have worked against the war effort and the country. He does not understand that he is giving a political perspective. Not a factual statement. I can say the reverse. People are so angry with persons like Gotabhaya who used the war cry  and war efforts to decimate the Tamils and brought oppression and misery to Sinhala masses. In fact people are beginning to understand the reality of Gotabhaya type thinking. They were promised heaven and prosperity. But now they are asked to suffer with hunger and misery. At the same time Mahinda promises to the global masters to implement an acceptable devolution for the Tamil homeland. At least that is what the masters of the regime, India, America and others are demanding; and they mean business. Masses, even the least educated can understand this is ‘Maha dena muththa’ thinking. First you cut the neck of the goat and then you smash the pot. Now what the regime has done is first to kill and decimate the Tamil nationality and then take steps to grant autonomy  to the Tamil homeland! Those who advocated, in the previous period, autonomy and peace efforts as a way out were classified as betrayers and traitors to Lanka. The fact is if a consistent peace effort was made then, we could have solved the problem without all this bloodshed and the enslavement to foreign powers. What really happened was to follow the idiotic path of Mahinda Chinthanaya at the expense of an intelligent way out. Bottom line of all this is the inability to see the needs of the other who is living with you sharing the same land and same resources.
I cannot speak for Paikiasothy or Frederica. But I know that I thought the war against liberation out fit is a disaster. That is what Marx and Lenin has taught me and I was convinced to risk my life to explain that. Gotabhaya or any other has the right to think that I am wrong and that my thinking is dangerous. But have they got the right to launch campaigns in public in government owned media organizations to discredit me as a traitor to be killed by stoning, say that they have the evidence that I stood for self determination of Tamils because I was paid by somebody, say that I am a bastard and an illegitimate child born to my dead mother Vimala Kotalawela?. All that is good journalism and patriotic spiritual conduct!  All I can say is that these people do not have the elementary sense of justice. 

Democratic legal system

It is the sense of equality  that creates the entire democratic legal system, Jefferson who said that; at least the bourgeoisie as a revolutionary  class that inaugurated the modern world, fiercely stood for equality  among its youth. Unfortunately that cannot be recreated in this backward society. In place of Jefferson we have Gotabhaya who had easily fallen in to a mess. He might say it is a conspiracy to discredit him. But the fact is he is exposed to be a man without a measure of things he is handling. He can confess “I did not do so. I used words such as ‘bloody’ or whatever, not to refer to her but to refer to the incident. I never used foul language on her - but I used certain words in the context that she provoked me unreasonably, in referring to the incident, as I have pointed out above. I mean these are words that are used very  commonly in America (USA) for instance, in normal usage. In fact a very high ranking officer of the American government (name withheld by this writer) met me and said about the TV programme Hard Talk and the person who does Hard Talk on BBC: ‘You know we are in the same boat... being questioned by that a..shole.’ This person was referring to Stephen Sackur who does the BBC programme Hard Talk. So this is very  common usage, in USA for instance, and they use these words in normal talk - but these people are trying to make a big issue out of it to get at me, because they hate me about the war. In any case I used certain words with reference to the incident; I did not use foul language to abuse her.” He can cry and say what he did was no worse than his masters in the west. But I do not believe that he could rescue what is lost.

Sunday Leader Editor Sues Media Minister For 50 Million

Jul-21-2012

Salem-News.com

Newspaper seeks damages and endeavors to set the record straight.

Media Minister Keheliya Rambukwella photo courtesy:lankanstuff.blogspot.com

(COLOMBO, Sri Lanka Sunday Times) - Lawyers for the Editor of The Sunday Leader Frederica Jansz on Friday sent a letter demanding 50 million rupees in damages to the Media Minister Keheliya Rambukwella for defamatory remarks made against her after the weekly post cabinet news conference on Thursday.

The publisher and the Editor of The Island newspaper were also sent similar letters of demand for publishing the minister’s allegations. The Island newspaper was the only media outlet in the country to report Rambukwella’s remarks.

The Island newspaper on Friday reported that “the government yesterday alleged that The Sunday Leader editor Frederica Jansz was critical of Defence Secretary Gotabhaya Rajapaksa since he had prevented her from obtaining a diplomatic posting abroad, through the good offices of President Mahinda Rajapaksa. Media Minister Keheliya Rambukwella, addressing the weekly Cabinet press briefing in Colombo, said that Frederica had met President Rajapaksa at Temple Trees recently, in the company of Gamini Abeyratne alias Taxi Abey and requested that she be posted abroad as a diplomat.

“The Defence Secretary on hearing of the meeting had objected to any favours being granted to Frederica,” Minister Rambukwella said.

The newspaper quotes the Minister as saying The Sunday Leader Editor’s allegations that Gothabaya Rajapaksa used foul language “may be due to malice on her part.”

The Minister, while confirming the remarks, contradicted The Island report saying he did not make the remarks at the post cabinet media briefing. “One of those guys asked me just after the briefing,” he told The Sunday Leader on Friday night.

Jansz, flatly denying that she ever asked for a personal favour from any politician, leave alone President Mahinda Rajapaksa, confirmed that she did meet the President on three occasions. In all three times there was at least one other person present.

The meeting where she is alleged to have asked for a job took place on May 06 last year after the former Deputy Chairman of Airport and Aviation Services from 2001-2004 in the Ranil Wickremesinghe government, Gamini Abeyratne conveyed an invitation saying “the President would like to meet you.”

Both Gamini Abeyratne and Treasury Secretary P. B. Jayasundera were present at the meeting. “It was a general chat. We discussed the white flag story and he referred to the financial issues at The Sunday Leader,” she said. Three days after the meeting Frederica Jansz wrote to the President stressing that there should be no misunderstanding on his part that she had asked for any favours. “Thank you for your time but I never have and never will seek political favours. Our troubles at The Sunday Leader are for Lal (Wickremetunge, the publisher) and me to address and resolve.” She said in the letter. However two days after The Sunday Leader published the outburst by Defence Secretary Gotabaya Rajapaksa, Gamini Abeyratne, now a Director at Mihin Lanka and a close confidant of the President phoned Jansz and said that Chairman of Sri Lanka Broadcasting Corporation Hudson Samarasinghe has asked for confirmation that he had taken Jansz to meet the President. Abeyratne says he refused and cut off the phone call.

Dr. P.B. Jayasundara was not contactable.

Mannar Mayhem; Minister rides roughshod over judiciary
Sunday 22 July 2012

By Ranga Jayasuriya

The government’s strongman in Mannar, Industry and Commerce Minister Rishad Bathiudeen is in the news for all the wrong reasons. Earlier, he was blamed for spearheading a policy that overtly favours his supporters while discriminating against local Tamils, in land allocation and doling out resettlement assistance. 
This time around, he had allegedly threatened the Mananar District Court Judge and Magistrate Anthony Pillai Judeson after the judge ordered the arrest of a group of men, alleged to be supporters of the minister over an arson attack of fisheries houses belonging to local Tamil fishermen. The minister had telephoned the judge to demand that he change the ruling, and warned him that unless the judge revokes the Court order ‘the Mannar court would be torched.’ When the judge did not comply with the ministers wish, a group of Muslims, believed to be acting under the political patronage, stormed the Mannar Court, pelted stones and set fire to a section of the Court on July 18.
After the attack on the Court, there had been two days of inaction on the part of the authorities. Judges and lawyers enraged by the official apathy boycotted courts on Friday. On the same day, President Mahinda Rajapaksa ordered the IGP to instruct the Criminal Investigation Department to launch an investigation into the incident. 
The run-up to the attack on the Court began with an arson attack on a group of fisher folks’ houses known as Madalwadiya belonging to Tamil fishermen on the night of July 13. 

‘Contempt of Court’

On July 16, Police produced a B report before Magistrate Anthony Pillai Judeson, stating that the arson attack had caused Rs.1.4 million damage. The judge ordered the arrest of the suspects. In the same hearing, the judge was told that the Tamil fishermen, whose houses were burnt in the arson attack had also been prevented from going to sea since late June by the thugs who enjoyed the patronage of a local Muslim politician. The judge ordered the Superintendent of Police to provide security for the aggrieved fishermen to go to sea.
On the morning of July 17, about 100 people gathered around the Court, holding protest placards against the judge. As the judge passed through the posse of protesters in his vehicle, he received a phone call from Minister Bathiudeen, who allegedly told the judge to revoke his order for arresting the arsonists in the July 13 attack. The judge responded, that the request amounted to Contempt of Court on the part of the minister, and that the minister should go to the Judicial Services Commission, should he be unhappy with the Court order. 
The angry minister reportedly retorted, calling the judge an LTTE supporter, and warning him of consequences for not complying with his order. He allegedly warned that the Court house would be burnt down by the mobs.
The judge complained to the Judiciary Service Commission (JSC) and later made a written complaint to the JSC, after being instructed by JSC officials.

Official apathy      Full Story>>>

Systemic, Not Regime Change

July 22, 2012

By Sanjana Hattotuwa -

Sanjana Hattotuwa

As so many times before, Gotabaya Rajapaksa’s most recent verbal assault is relegated to the memory of a few. He continues to hold high and influential public office. The regime dealt with the fallout as it always does – masterfully manipulating a fractured, fearful media community by inviting them over to Temples Trees for a spot of dinner and running a hilariously pathetic interview in a newspaper to give Gotabaya’s ‘side’ of the verbal assault. But few were interested in the issue to begin with. Business as usual, just as the government would like it to be.

Soon after Gotabaya’s tirade, there was some talk of a civil society petition calling for his resignation. To the knowledge of this columnist, this statement, for whatever reason, never saw light of day. Perhaps, just as well. There is a photo – very easily found via Google or Bing – that shows the President hugging his younger brother six years ago. It is clearly not a staged photo, since neither subject looks particularly dignified, in the manner they usually appear hung in government institutions or projected through mainstream media. Mahinda, eyes closed and with an impish smile, hugs the younger brother. Gotabaya, spectacles in hand, gives a smile visibly more genuine than any he’s flashed since.

In this intensely private moment though shared in public, there are at least two markers for regime change idealists. One, to deal with Gotabaya is to really confront the protection afforded to him – as family – by the President. Two, and extending the previous point, is that those desirous of removing Gotabaya from office are in fact perceived to suggest the President is himself unfit to hold office. A call for accountability over one brother is an affront to all. Go after one member – brother, son, wife or relative – and it is the full, and in this case, brute force of family one faces. The answer is perhaps to not to call for resignations. They hold no real traction anyway. Not unlike increasing the space for the regime to engage in international fora that this columnist has argued for previously, the answer to the regime’schutzpah and violence is to continue to give them access to public platforms and meticulously record their excesses, so that as US citizens first or Sri Lankans, they have no place to hide when their sustained record of violence becomes too much to escape, ignore, censor or spin away.

We need to be principled in this endeavour. We do not need to know who Madini Chandradasa is beyond the fact that a few years ago, she was part of an all female crew that for the first time in Sri Lankan aviation history, flew from Colombo to Trichy. She has, unless proven otherwise, not stolen from public coffers. Largely speculative stories based on who she is in a relationship with, coupled with photos of the girl plastered in the media only adds to the regime’s censoriousness and strengthens official pushback, to the detriment of everyone in civil society. Even those most convinced of regime change by whatever means surely have no truck with Madini. It is the government that calls us and our families, colleagues and friends, terrorists. Let us not embrace their argot or lens. Let’s also be honest about calling for and working towards systemic change, lest we end up like Egypt after its revolution early last year. What can we make of, for example, the UNP’s recent decision to extend, without any chance of removal, the term of its party leader? Surely, isn’t this no less despotic and illiberal than the government the party is opposed to? Where are the calls for the UNP’s leader to resign for holding on to power at great cost? Who is questioning how a party that’s so unashamedly undemocratic can be trusted with meaningful change in governance and government?

We need to go back to that photo of Mahinda and Gotabaya. Captured in that frame is what most in society continue to perceive no matter what either brother does or says. Mindlessly shaming and naming those who only through biological accident are related to the first family risks isolating pockets of broader support in favour of accountability. We need to afford the first family the essential dignity they deny or deracinate for so many others. The threat of isolation and removal from office can enhance, not decrease, domestic regime support. This columnist would argue it is better to give government the space and platforms to undo themselves, from inside. Seen this way, periodic outbursts of the most outrageous expletives are to be welcomed, not merely feared.

The day will come when the government will not be able face public opprobrium over the accumulation of and impatience over these manic excesses. It will not happen because of civil society. That blessed day will come because the regime itself will architect it, despite itself.

All a few of us can and must do in the interim is bear witness, and fearlessly record for posterity.

Sajanana’s blog ; http://sanjanah.wordpress.com/