GSL Takes U Turn, Will Cooperate With UNHRC

By Namini Wijedasa -September 1, 2012

Namini Wijedasa

Sri Lanka’s domestic rights situation will be closely analyzed by the international community during the UN Human Rights Council’s sessions in November. And in its country report recently submitted to the council – and published on the HRC website on Friday – the government has declared itself willing and ready to cooperate.
Over the past five weeks, Sri Lanka’s Permanent Representative to the UN in Geneva, Ravinatha Ariyasinghe has reportedly met with more than 50 of his counterparts from member or prospective member states of the Human Rights Council. Sources in Geneva said that Sri Lankan diplomats have also engaged with “the more reputed” international non-governmental organizations involved in human rights.

Finally ready to talk

This is a marked departure from the ‘no deal, no compromise’ stance the government adopted during the sessions in March, when a US-led resolution on Sri Lanka was passed with 24 to 15 votes. But it should come as no surprise. The resolution was seen as a pressure tactic (as, indeed, it was) and therefore vehemently opposed by Colombo.
The country report reiterates that the resolution – and a previous, unsuccessful initiative in 2009 – were “unhelpful attempts to needlessly draw attention to the situation in Sri Lanka.” “These ill-conceived, unwarranted, unnecessary and intrusive attempts did not result in any tangible benefits for the Sri Lankan people over and above what the Government of Sri Lanka set out to do and has been able to achieve for them,” it states.
On the contrary, Sri Lanka has made it clear that it will cooperate in its Universal Period Review (UPR) in November. Sources say that Ariyasinghe has met both with countries that opposed the resolution in March as well as with those that “have problems” with Sri Lanka. He has provided them with perspective about developments here, updates on his discussions with Navi Pillay, the UN high commissioner for Human Rights, and how Sri Lanka sees the future trajectory. The same applies to his talks with INGOs.
It is unlikely that Sri Lanka thinks its notoriously acrimonious relations with these groups could be mended overnight. But the government is certainly denying them the excuse that it doesn’t engage – a complaint often made by Sri Lanka’s detractors, both state and non-state.

Saner foreign policy strategy                                    Read More

Syrian crisis - a case study in ‘regime change’ politics

[TamilNet, Saturday, 01 September 2012, 07:54 GMT]
Even as Western governments are stepping up covert and overt pressure on the current Syrian regime of Bashar al-Assad, those following the Kurdish national question are unsure of the future of Kurdish regions in Syria. With reports emerging of Turkey arming the anti-Assad force ‘Free Syrian Army’ (FSA) that receives support from governments in the West, simultaneously Turkey pursues a militarist approach against the PKK. There is apprehension that Turkey might use the opportunity to strike at Kurdish regions in Syria to deal a blow to the PKK sphere of influence. At this conjuncture, those Tamils who are considering Western intervention in Syria as a positive step against repressive regimes should study in detail the intricacies of ‘geopolitics of regime change’ and the dynamics of the Kurdish national struggle in the region, commented a Tamil political analyst. 

Bashar al-Assad’s Syrian government, which has been criticized by many for being a dictatorial government that favours an Alawite minority, is also considered a secular regime in a region of theocratic states. The FSA on the other hand is an ‘umbrella group’ largely composed of Sunnis and it is alleged that it also has foreign fighters from the al-Qaeda. 

While Kurds were discriminated under the Assad regime, after the Syrian crisis unfolded in 2011, they were able to get some sort of political relief through a reduction in Syrian government intervention in their affairs. The Democratic Union Party (PYD), a Kurdish political force located in Northern Syria, a region which has a sizeable number of Kurds and considered as Western Kurdistan, is negotiating for a Kurdish autonomous region within Syria, a better version of the Iraqi Kurdistan Regional Government. 

Turkey, however, has accused the PYD as being a front of the PKK and is working hard to ensure that a politically significant autonomous Kurdish region does not emerge in the region. In television interviews in July 2012, Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan has expressed the opinion that greater autonomy to Kurds in Northern Syria would affect Turkey’s interests and that Turkey would intervene against “those terrorist formations”. 

Ankara, which allied with Assad when he was repressive towards the Kurds, is now backing the opposition forces after the Kurds managed to wean out some concession from the Syrian regime. The FSA too is reported to be cooperating with Turkey in ensuring that the PKK does not extend its influence into Syria. Likewise, Syrian opposition forces have started accusing the PYD of siding with Assad and for exploiting the opportunity to get autonomy for the Kurds in Syria. 

Turkey and the West are engaging only with those political forces in Syria that are not working with the PYD and desisting from providing greater autonomy to the Kurds. One of them is the Syrian National Council (SNC), a major player in opposition politics, which was officially formed in Istanbul, Turkey. The SNC recognizes the Kurds only as a minority and has offered administrative decentralization to them as the highest political solution. 

Kurds on their part have formed the Kurdish Supreme Committee, jointly comprised of the PYD and the Kurdish National Council (KNC), which now rules as a shadow state, with its own local defence forces, in the Kurdish regions that the Syrian government forces vacated. 

This development has set off alarms in Ankara, which sees the emergence of such a zone with pro-autonomy Kurdish groups as a boost for the PKK. And as recent clashes with PKK increase and police repression in Kurdish areas intensify, Turkey is seeking for a friendly regime in Syria that would restrict any sort of political or ideological support for PKK in its territory. 

Turkey’s defence circles of late are also excessively referring to the ‘Sri Lanka model’ to deal with the Kurdish movement. 

While Western establishments have strongly condemned the Assad regime for human rights violations and have given legitimacy to Syrian opposition forces, very little has been said about a political solution to the Kurds. 

A report of the ICG on “Syria’s Mutating Conflict” released on 1st August criticized the methods used by the current regime to crush opposition and recognized the support of the West, Turkey and other regional forces to the Syrian opposition. It also appealed to the opposition to ensure a political transition that would be pluralistic, which would accommodate the interests of groups like Alawites, Christians, Druze, Ismailis and Kurds, lumping all together as minorities. 
* * *
Speaking to TamilNet a Tamil political analyst involved in solidarity building among the Nations without State said that the crisis in Syria must be studied as a case in regime change politics and its implications for oppressed nations.

His comments follow:

“It is popularly said among Kurds that they have no friends but the mountains. From the vested interests of different powers operating in the regions in and around Kurdistan, they have an experience of historical betrayals and partial political settlements.” 

“However, the Kurdish national struggle has also matured to a point that it makes opportune use of a political crisis in its region with the long term interests of its goals in mind, without falling for temporary solutions. The way the Kurds have utilized the situation in Syria makes it clear that there is no black and white perspective on the Syrian regime and the Syrian opposition, and that the Kurds are willing to critically engage with different forces so as to strengthen themselves politically. This is also seen in the formation of a united front in the Kurdish Supreme Committee with ideologically different groups.” 

“Emboldened by the internationally abetted genocide in Mu’l’livaaykkaal, states like Turkey openly talk about a Sri Lanka solution to militarily combat the Kurds.”

“At the other end, the human rights groups like ICG churn out watered down political solutions to the Kurds like minority rights, political pluralism etc that would ensure the smoother flow of the interests of the establishments.” 

“Eezham Tamils continue to face structural genocide without recognition of a just political solution owing to this hard and soft approach used by the so-called IC”

“The Kurds have learnt from this. We need to learn from the Kurds in being able to convert a crisis to our advantage.”

“Already the world powers, who clearly know that what is happening to the Eezham Tamils in the island is genocide, are on a process of bringing a regime change in Sri Lanka for a ‘pluralistic’ government which would treat the Tamils ‘properly as minorities’. To this extent, numerous political games are being played in the diaspora and in the island to arm-twist the Tamils into a temporary solution.” 

“The Kurdish experience also shows the vital importance of a rear-base for any struggle. Our political rear-base is definitely in 70 million population of Tamils in the state of Tamil Nadu. In the post-Mu’l’livaaykkaal scenario, it is imperative that this resource be politically tapped. The onus lies greatly on the diaspora to remain firm on fundamentals and to engage and convince political actors of all shades in Tamil Nadu to take a conceptually clear stand on Tamil Eelam.”

Presidential Challengers And The National Question: “Single-Issue” Challenge Will Unify All

By Kumar David -September 1, 2012

Prof. Kumar David

If there is one demand on which a cross-section of society, irrespective of ideology or ethnic and religious persuasion can be rallied, it is the demand for the abolition of the Executive Presidency (EP). The Sinhalese, the minorities, persons of all faiths, a majority in the SLFP, the UNP, the JVP, the Frontline, the Backline,  indeed everybody who is fed with the EP and thinks the Eighteenth Amendment and the rotten EP-regime is blight upon the country can unite for this single well targeted objective.

The one-issue framework is a necessary condition for bread-based unity. A single-issue candidate is a person whose platform consists of the sole task of abolishing the EP and setting in motion the processes for amending the Constitution or writing a new one as necessary to supplement this change. On the morrow of victory it may be necessary to dissolve parliament and elect a new one if the then existing one refuses to align with the mandate to abolish the EP, or it may be better to institute a constituent assembly, etc, these are later matters and bridges to be crossed when reached. The crucial point at this stage is that a single-issue candidate declares: “I will abolish the EP, ensure that a parliamentary system is set up, and then I’m off, I have no further political ambitions”.

A name that has been suggested as a single-issue candidate is that of Ven Maduluwewa Sobitha Thero and he is a good choice if he presents himself as a single-issue challenger. However I have been informed that the good Thero is not interesting in the presidency because of his religious role. Since the single-issue president will hold office for only a very short period, say one year, and since he/she will be tasked with just one duty, abolishing the EP and putting in place a parliamentary system, I don’t see any objection to any person who has courage undertaking the task. Defeating the incumbent is a precondition for getting started on the task hence a candidate who can break Rajapakse’s Sinhala-Buddhist petty-bourgeois base is the most suitable. Abolishing the EP can truthfully be called a matter of national salvation which surely is not beneath the dignity of a monk!

Several other names have been bandied around; Chandrika, Sarath Silva, Justice Warawewa and of courseRanil himself, but the first two have ruined their reputations and won’t stand a chance at the pools, and frankly speaking even if they swear till they are blue in the face that they are single-issue devotees with no further ambitions, nobody will trust any of them. People say that Sobitha is the exception and that if he gives such a promise he will keep his word.

Why the national question?

It can be reasonably said that the attitude of a single-issue candidate to the national question, economic policy, foreign relations or anything else is irrelevant. Once the EP is abolished the person will go home and play no further role in running the country; so what does his policy stance on any of these issues matter? This is true and this is the strength of a single-issue candidate and underlines the prospect of drawing upon a wide support base. Nevertheless there are two reasons why public perceptions of the candidate’s stance on the national question will be important.

Capturing the Ceylon Tamil, Muslim and Upcountry Tamil vote will provide a hefty boost to the chances of victory. Certain candidates can challenge and break Mahinda’s grip on the Sinhala petty bourgeois vote and fracture his rural base, but to deliver a coup de grace the candidate needs to capitalise on the 30% non-SB vote in the country. If the candidate is seen as a narrow SB-nationalist, the minorities may rightly choose to stay away and let dog eat dog; it is churlish to throw away such a large sure-bet vote bank. It is true that some Tamils voted for Fonseka despite allegations of war-crimes while a large number also abstained; does the next challenger wish to take the same risk?

The second reason why the candidate’s stance on the national question matters is that though he may present himself as a single-issue candidate, his outlook and ideology on other issues will have an influence the new constitution and/or constitutional amendments. And the NQ is a constitutional matter unlike socio-economic or foreign policy. The single-issue challengers views on the NQ though unrelated to the EP will still form an unwritten mandate for constitutional amendment; so they do matter. Therefore it does count a great deal whether the candidate is a progressive or a reactionary on devolution, providing constitutional guarantees for minority rights, language, religion, and like issues.

What is known is not so good

The general perception is that most Sinhalese politicians are SB-nationalists if not chauvinists. Some (Sobitha, Sarath Silva) were movers in the campaign to release Fonseka; I too supported this campaign but for different reasons. My concern was democratic rights, opposition to trumped up charges and resentment at convicting people in kangaroo courts to slake the vengeance of the Rajapakses. Many like me, who demanded the release of Fonseka, did so because we wished to take a stand against the trampling underfoot of democratic rights. The rhetoric was different among others who wanted a hero who had fought the evil enemy and saved the country from Tamil terrorists honoured, not incarcerated! Well that’s ok for people of a certain ideological persuasion, but it’s just a hair’s breadth away from SB-chauvinism.

The other thing that seems not so good is this. What have some of these potential candidates done since the end of the war to mix with, understand and alleviate the harsh reality of Tamil life in the occupied regions? I wonder whether any have visited IDP camps and dismal resettlement colonies and apprised themselves of the ground reality. Never mind electioneering, isn’t this what one would expect from any righteous person? Better if a prospective president mixes and associates with Tamils and Muslims a lot more. On this count Mahinda is far ahead; he can even speak a smattering of Tamil.

Sandya Eknaligoda on disappearances

Saturday, 01 September 2012

Society for Threatened Peoples, Bern, Geneva, I am Sandhya Ekneligoda, wife of Prageeth Ekneligoda, a Sri Lankan cartoonist and media activist who disappeared on the 24^th of January 2010. I became a human rights defender because I am a victim of a human rights violation. Today is it the 947^th day since Prageeth disappeared.

I am a Sinhalese, a Buddhist and mother of two sons. We live close to our capital Colombo.

There are many like me in Sri Lanka today, mothers, fathers, husbands, wives and children of the disappeared. Many of them are from the north and east of the country, where even three years after the war ended they live under a heavily militarized regime. They don’t even have the freedom to cry out in their sorrow.

In the past years, as a law abiding citizen of my country, I have gone to every single place that I could, to seek help in my search for Prageeth – to the Police, to the National Human Rights Commission, to the Courts. I have written any number of letters appealing for help to find Prageeth, including to the President, to the President’s wife, to the Attorney General, to Ministers and to Members of Parliament. Nobody has taken any responsibility for investigating his disappearance. Nor I have received any other kind of support from any of them.

Some of you may know that on September 11, 2011, at the review of Sri Lanka’s report to the Committee against Torture, Mohan Peiris, the Legal Adviser to the Cabinet in Sri Lanka who was a member of the official delegation told the Committee that the government had received information that Prageeth was alive and had sought refuge in a foreign country. For over 7 months after that day I tried to get some verification of this. I asked the Human Rights Commission to bring Mr. Peiris before a Magistrate so that we could find out the truth of this matter. Finally, after 7 months, Mr. Peiris appeared before the Magistrate. When shown the transcript of what he had said, Mr. Peiris said that he had received the information from a member of the Intelligence Unit whose name he had forgotten. He said only God knows about Prageeth Ekneligoda. This is the extent to which officials of the government of Sri Lanka care about human lives. If this is the case with me, a Sinhala woman from the south, what do you think would be the situation of Tamil and Muslim women from the north and south who are also searching for their missing and disappeared children and family members?

In Sri Lanka today, disappearance has become a social issue. When you hear speakers on any public platform refer to opposition politics, to social issues, to human rights issues, to labour issues, they often end with the words ‘ Who knows but I be the next person to be ‘disappeared’  because I spoke for social justice’. Some social activists have been forced to stop some of their work. Other than a few who are close to the government, most people in Sri Lanka today are knowingly or unknowingly caught up in this new reign of terror.

When Prageeth disappeared, many people asked me why I had done nothing to stop him from doing what he did. But why should I have stopped him? He was not doing anything wrong. He was doing something good and positive for our future. Today disappearances have taken over our political body. It is an anti-social act that is supported by those in power.

It is in the 1978-1979 period, when the Tamil nationalist movement began to be more militant, that disappearance first began to be used as a political tool. Disappearances in Sri Lanka first came to the attention of the UN and of the Working Group on Disappearances in the 1988-1989 period. That was indeed a reign of terror. The UN Working Group came to Sri Lanka in 1991 and in 1992. The establishment of the National Human Rights Commission was one of the outcomes. Today we are asking for the Working Group to visit Sri Lanka again. This is far more important for us than a visit by the High Commissioner.

Sadly, what is the situation of the National Human Rights Commission today? It is completely ineffective. My experiences with them have been very distasteful. After I had written 5 letters to them, one after another, about asking Mohan Peiris to clarify his statement to the Committee against Torture, the Chairperson responded to me asking me to stop writing to them with unreasonable demands. They often refuse to accept our complaints and appeals. Why must this be so? The Commissioners are all appointed by the President. They serve the interests of the person who has secured this position for them, they don’t serve us, the people.  The National Human Rights Commission is not working in keeping with the Paris principles. It is essential that it becomes an autonomous body that can provide justice, protection and relief to victims of human rights violations in Sri Lanka.

The report of the government’s Lessons Learned and Reconciliation Commission (LLRC) has a recommendation calling for the appointment of a Special Commissioner on Disappearances. This could be an important mechanism if it is an independent one, and has the resources to carry out its work.

Prageeth was the main breadwinner in our family. After he disappeared our entire family maintenance structure broke down. It is the same for many of us from the families of the disappeared. We need to have some system for ensuring compensation and reparation for our loss.

In 1994 under President Chandrika Kumaratunga, a memorial was built for those who disappeared in the

1988-1989 period. It was called the Shrine of Innocents. The same person who defended the families of the disappeared in the past, the present President Mahinda Rajapakse, has had this monument bulldozed and destroyed in order to acquire the land for an urban development project.

We have never been able to bring the perpetrators of disappearances to justice in Sri Lanka. Some of those responsible for disappearances in 1988-1989 have remained in high positions in subsequent governments. They are not afraid of continuing to commit these violations. They don’t care about abducting people in broad daylight. They are confident that they will not be punished. They know they will be protected by the President and by politicians. This is the worst kind of impunity. It is only if we set up a system for investigating and punishing the crime of disappearances in Sri Lanka that our children will live in a country free of fear.

To summarize our recommendations, we call on the Government of Sri Lanka

To invite or accept a visit of the Working Group on Enforced or Involuntary Disappearance and give their observations and recommendations priority in governmental action.

To appoint an Independent Special Commissioner on Disappearances endowed with sufficient resources to carry out his work.

To elaborate a holistic approach to the issue of disappearances that includes complaint mechanisms, witness protection, remedy, compensation and reparation for victims of enforced disappearances.

To urgently take measures to end impunity in the country, hold perpetrators accountable and do justice to victims of violence and crimes.

Sandhya Ekneligoda

Geneva, August 31, 2012

Speech made by Sandya Eknaligida on behalf Society for Threatened Peoples

www.gfbv.ch at the informal UPR briefing organised by UPR INFO.

Murder Of The Judiciary

By Tirantha Walaliyadda -September 1, 2012

Tirantha Walaliyadda PC

We are not final because we are infallible; we are infallible because we are final,” said a Chief Justice of the United States referring to the Supreme Court. This statement was referred to by Chief Justice Asoka de Silva in his ceremonial address to the Bar upon his appointment as Chief Justice. Now we find judges’ houses being stoned, courts being attacked by the public and even excreta being thrown at judges within the court as well as police stations being besieged by the public in protest of action or inaction by the said institutions. Why is this happening? Is it fault from within or without or both?

The business of law may be placed in two broad categories: law enforcement and the administration of justice. Law enforcement is the business of the police and the Attorney General and other departments involved in crime investigations. Administration of justice is a matter for the judiciary. Facilitation of the administration of justice and law enforcement is the responsibility of the Bar. Failure or apparent failure in any of these areas will inevitably lead to discontent and frustration within the public with the end result of violent reaction by the public. Maybe it is time that the powers that be looked into these matters with seriousness of thought and perspective without pursuing an indifferent and self serving course which will surely end in a bloody and destructive confrontation which, at the end of the day, will serve no purpose to anyone.

The judiciary, law enforcement, and the Bar comprise the backbone of the democratic system. But when the Bar boycotts the courts for whatever reason, and if the judiciary accommodates such trade union activity by the Bar with a big hurrah, where does it leave the litigants who have come desperately to court in search of maintenance, divorce, bail, custody of children, and other urgent applications? And, when the Bar deserts the litigants in a frenzy of indignation for whatever reason what becomes the litigants and their woes and their Constitutional rights for which they retain lawyers?  Where legal remedies are available in a particular situation the Bar should, in my view, pursue those remedies instead of resorting to rash and rowdy conduct such as boycotting the courts and taking to the streets thereby causing havoc to the legal system in a democratic framework, which system within that framework must remain stubbornly immovable, unemotional, confident, and stable. What is the message that the Bar is sending to the public?

In terms of law enforcement and the administration of justice, corruption comes in two forms: intellectual and material. Intellectual corruption occurs when the law is twisted by the administrators of justice and law enforcement in great expectations. Material corruption in basic terms occurs where the law is twisted for monetary gain in whatever form. Portia’s judgment against Shylock in The Merchant of Venice was intellectual corruption. So also was the judgment against Socrates as recorded in Plato’s Apology where Socrates was sentenced to death by a biased and vengeful people. Intellectual corruption ends where material corruption begins.

A judiciary without a conscience is a judiciary no more. It becomes a piece of machinery and in terms of the State, it becomes an instrument of State power to be manipulated at will and justice falls by the wayside causing irreparable damage to the social structure in which it functions invoking the wrath of the people and pushing the nation into a state of lawlessness and anarchy.

The law should not be abused by its keepers or by its administrators or by its enforcers. The law is for the protection of the sovereign rights of the people. Passing dozens of laws is not the answer to the problem. It is the effective and impartial enforcement and administration of them that should be safeguarded. It is also the duty of the Bar to secure the rights of the people in terms of the Constitution which does not endorse the abandonment of the people in a so-called righteous indignation of the alleged acts of a few.

Contempt of court falls into two categories; those committed in the presence of the court and those committed outside. Where contempt is committed in the presence of an original court, the culprits may be dealt with summarily by the same court. Where contempt is committed outside an original court the action for contempt has to be filed in the Court of Appeal. Where contempt is committed in the presence of the court then the court will direct the law enforcement authorities to arrest and produce the alleged perpetrators and deal with them according to law in terms of summary procedure which is a show cause action. Where contempt is committed outside the court, action will be filed in the Court of Appeal and the Court of Appeal, if it considers appropriate, will take action on the issue. In a case of contempt in the presence of and before an original court the judge is not an aggrieved party: the contempt is not against the judge but against the authority of court and a court has no individuality. It does not belong to the judge but is a part of the judiciary which is called upon by Parliament to exercise the judicial power of the people in terms of the Constitution. As such, in matters of contempt, the Bar should not represent the judge but it may represent the judiciary. If not, the judge comes under obligation to the Bar and thereby loses credibility in future legal matters before him or her.

These are matters which the judiciary and the Bar should consider carefully before stampeding into glorious action with sound and fury.  It may well amount to another version of the Charge of the Light Brigade by Alfred Lord Tennyson.

Art Gallery security guard abducted and released
Sunday 02 September 2012

Art Gallery security guard abducted and released

By a special Correspondent

Media spokesman, JHU, Nishantha Warnasinghe says that the investigations carried out by the police into the Colombo Museum robbery and the subsequent revelation of a drug addict being its mastermind is nothing but a drama being enacted by the police to deceive the masses.
Speaking to LAKBIMAnEWS, Warnasinghe said: “This unprecedented robbery took place on March 16 this year. From then on the police have been conducting investigations and apparently those investigations went in various directions. But we have some serious questions regarding the latest statements made with regard to this robbery.”
“We as the JHU, are only concerned whether the police would be able to secure all the items that were looted from the Museum or not. We do not want to get entangled with the police media spokesman through debates as to whether the police have been hoodwinking the people or not. If the police have carried out their investigations, we urge them to show the country pictures of the items that were robbed and those that have been recovered,” Warnasinghe said.

‘Don’t waste time’
“There is no point in just showcasing suspects to the country at large. We expect  them to identify the real robbers and see that they are persecuted, and not waste their time by going after drug addicts. If the police have a backbone they should identify the perpetrators of this crime and reveal who they are to the general public,” he added.
“We also want to know if all the items stolen from the Museum have been recovered or not. Have these items been disfigured or are they in the same condition when they were stolen,  or are parts of certain items found consequent to the robbery. Finally we want to know whether the said items are those actually looted from the Museum,” Warnasinghe questioned.

Verification should be sought
“These queries could be verified through the additional director general of the Museum or the director general of Archeology, Dr. Senerath Dissanayake, but none of these issues have been addressed so far,” he pointed out.
The JHU media spokesman also urged the Minister of National Heritage Dr. Jagath Balasooriya to go before the country and make a proclamation to that effect, adding that he should have the courage to do so.
He said that it is the media that had reported of a possible nexus between the Museum robbery and some government politicos.
“And if there is no connection between government politicos and this unprecedented robbery then that could also be proven only by the police and disclosed to the country, and if they do not, they cannot prevent  people from forming different perceptions about this robbery,” averred Warnasinghe.

Dictators Are Not Immune From Justice Processes

By Kishali Pinto-Jayawardena -September 1, 2012 

Kishali Pinto-Jayawardena

Dictators who believe that they are immune from being brought to justice for the crimes that they commit should take a long, hard look at what is happening around us in the wider global community. And let me add a caveat right at the start. This is not a precursor to a discussion on the mechanisms of international justice by the United Nations, the workings of which (it must be conceded) have a long way more to go before they can be a sufficient deterrent to abusive leaders.

Persistent demands by the Guatemalan people

On the contrary, the focus of this reflection is to look at the realities of domestic justice. Guatemala is an interesting case in point. Horrific human rights abuses committed by the administration (with the covert support of the United States) against its own people more than thirty years ago, are now before the domestic justice institutions.

Led by a courageous prosecutor and former human rights activist, this process has resulted not only in charges of war crimes being brought against soldiers who had tortured and murdered civilians but also, most remarkably, the prosecution of a former military leader and president of the country.

Certainly, International attention in regard to the plight of the victims played its part in bringing about this demand for justice. But make no mistake about the fact that it was the persistent cries of the Guatemalan people which led to this transformation of a long standing culture of impunity for abusive state agents and political leaders. The process has been laborious, painfully slow and at times, frustrating. However, current events show that the wait has been worth the while. The voices of those whose loves ones were slaughtered without mercy are ultimately having their proverbial day in the sun, however bitter sweet and tormenting this may be.

Voices for justice

Indeed, these voices for justice never lost their power throughout the dreary years when it seemed that the abusive and the powerful would triumph. When a most extensive report detailing the abuses that took place was compiled by Guatemala’s Commission for Historical Clarification, (the body was mandated not to judge but rather to clarify the history of the civil war), their findings were prefaced by an appeal from a survivor’s testimony that “Let the history we lived, be taught in the schools so that it is never forgotten, so that our children may know it”.

Instructively for Sri Lanka as we mark the International Day of the Victims of Enforced Disappearances this week, this Commission documents an exceptionally moving account of three decades of agony. It expresses the hope that the violence and horrors described in the report should leave no room for despair. That, ” (on the contrary), despite the shock that that the nation should suffer upon seeing itself reflected in the mirror of its past, it was to be hoped that the truth would lead to reconciliation  the victims whose past had been degraded and manipulated will be dignified (while) the perpetrators, through the recognition of their immoral and criminal acts, will be able to recover the dignity of which they had deprived themselves.”

Its main purpose was to place on record Guatemala’s bloody past. The country’s armed confrontation, largely between its ruling elite and the ethnic Mayan people, had caused death and destruction. But the gravity of the abuses suffered repeatedly by the people had yet to become part of the national consciousness.

Questions of key import

Its mandate was to seek answers to questions of key import. Why were innocent people compelled to live under the shadow of fear, death and disappearances for more than 34 years? Why were there daily threats in the lives of ordinary citizens having no connection with armed groups or paramilitary groups? Who can explain the extreme human rights abuses committed by both forces and specially by the State? Why did defenceless children suffer acts of savagery? Why did these acts of outrageous brutality, which showed no respect for the most basic rules of humanitarian law, religious ethics and cultural spirituality, take place? No doubt many in Sri Lanka would feel immediate empathy with these searching questions that go to the very core of a country’s moral and legal dilemmas.

In Guatemala’s case, persons killed since the outbreak of the internal armed confrontation in 1962 were estimated to be over two hundred thousand with state forces and related paramilitary being responsible for 93% of the deaths. Guerrilla forces were held accountable for 3% of these atrocities while the remaining 4% concerned deaths where it had not been possible to determine responsibility. The victims included men, women and children of all social strata, working professionals, church members, politicians, peasants, students and academics. In ethnic terms, the vast majority were Mayans.

Complicity of high political authorities

The majority of human rights violations occurred with the knowledge or by order of the highest authorities of the state. Drawing important parallels with current conflicts and in a forerunner to the determined efforts of state prosecutors decades later, the Commission on Historical Clarification dismissed the excuse that lower ranking army officers were acting with a wide margin of autonomy without orders from their superiors. It reminded relevantly that, up to that point, no high commander, officer or person in the mid level command of the Army or state security forces had been tried or convicted for human rights abuses. Only significantly lower ranking personnel, whose trials were attended with monumental publicity, had been tried and convicted. These violations were determined to be the result of an institutional policy, with impunity handed down by high officials for those aberrant state agents.

The high military commanders of the insurgents were meanwhile cited for deliberate attacks on civilians. Interestingly, the role of the Church in the Guatemalan conflict was severely critiqued with the Commission observing that the divisive policies it adopted led to a further fragmentation of the national identity.

The mills of justice grind exceedingly well

The discussions that evolved around the findings of this Commission and other similar bodies were the primary impetus that led to Guatemalan state prosecutors ultimately bringing high political leaders to trial.

True, problems remain regarding the reach of the law to those who are still powerful on the political stage but the trials that are taking place are a good reminder that the mills of domestic justice in some countries may grind slow but do indeed grind exceedingly well. Certainly, these are apt warnings to political leaders who dismiss the need for accountability in governance with disdain and contempt, believing themselves to be invincible.

Govt. intelligence report warns Govt.: NC and Eastern PC elections cannot be won
(Lanka-e-News -01.Sep.2012, 4.30PM) The Govt. intelligence service has confidentially informed the regime chief in a report that the ruling party , the UPFA will not be able to emerge victorious in the North Central and the Eastern provinces in the forthcoming PC elections to be held in three provinces, according to reports reaching Lanka e news.

This report had been forwarded prior to the Regime chief’s tour of Iran. The report had mentioned that the election climate is unfavorable to the Govt. in the north east and at Polonnaruwa , defeat is a foregone conclusion.

The regime chief after receiving that report, had in his characteristic style of winning elections by foul if he cannot by fair means , had addressed his crooked leaders of those districts and warned them that the elections shall be won by hook or by crook , and power retained by the Alliance in these PCs. In order to execute the regime chief’s deplorable instructions , two notorious shameless Presidential advisors, namely , Victor Perera , a former IGP and Chandra Fernando who are most known for frightening and intimidating the opposition parties using the police powers had already been dispatched to those provinces.

FUTA Can And Must Rise Above Unionism

By Malinda Seneviratne -

Malinda Seneviratne

The trade union action launched by the Federation of University Teachers’ Associations (FUTA) has entered its third month.  The universities are closed.  Negotiations between FUTA and relevant authorities do not indicate any signs of quick resolution.  FUTA is now threatening to boycott A/L paper marking and has won the support of various teacher unions to keep away as well.

It is heartening that academics have thought fit to embrace the larger issue of education policy, although it is claimed that this was necessary because the salary-hike demand was unreasonable and even indefensible.  Indeed, the FUTA thrust is a lot of ‘gimme, gimme, gimme’ with very little by way of giving on the part of the academic community.  The focus now is to get the Government to set aside for education an amount equivalent to 6% of the GDP.

Forgotten in the comparison of Sri Lanka’s allocations with countries in the region and those of similar economic status is the fact that the stand out cases cited are currently spending large chunks of the budget to do what Sri Lanka has done over several decades.  Such countries seem to have realized (rather late in the day) that basics must be put in place and therefore invested in.  Glossed over, also, is the fact that the GDP denominator is growing;Sri Lanka’s growth rate has averaged 8% over the past 6 years and the education-allocation numerator naturally is not keeping pace.  FUTA doesn’t have to worry about where the money would come from. The Government would have to either borrow (compromising the other strident demand by all parties to maintain fiscal discipline) or cut budgets for other sectors, for example health.  FUTA can say ‘cut wastage instead’, but that’s a suggestion that all aggrieved groups can make, and something that would require solid institutional safeguards that yield good transparency and accountability. The question is, can nothing be done before push, pull, sobriety and risk of losing power yield us better governance structures?

To begin with, even academics themselves have compromised FUTA’s cause in numerous ways, no one will deny that the Government pot doesn’t have the moral right to call the FUTA kettle ‘black’.  Incompetence, lack of vision, corruption, lack of integrity, an aversion to checks and balances etc., are common to both parties.  It is in this context that the worth of the 6%-demand needs to be assessed.

FUTA has not been unreasonable for the demand-sheet includes a time frame for the increase.  Where FUTA is lacking and the Government is silent is on the fact that current allocations are not derived from a coherent and forward-thinking policy paradigm.  Whether or not ‘6%’ is feasible or even makes sense, it is important to take into account the utter lack of logic in the overall education policy of successive governments.  FUTA naturally wants more bucks for salaries, other benefits and research.  More crucially, though, there seems to be total silence by both parties and their respective cheering squads about the details pertaining to the overall crisis in education. In other words, what’s being done (and not done) with the 1.9% or 2.9% (the rupee equivalent as proportion of GDP) is not being talked about enough.

There are gaping holes in the thrust that promises ‘no one will be left behind’.  Increasing dropout rates at the primary level, closing down of schools, lack of professionally qualified teachers etc., indicate that the foundational levels are cracking up.  Also, this country sorely needs a comprehensive occupational classification as part of overall development strategy which can inform meaningful resource allocation to the entire education system.  We have simply failed in the effort to ensure that graduates, say, have the opportunity to secure meaningful and dignified employment.    As of now, the mismatch and accumulated incompetency produces thousands of disgruntled graduates few would hire and who are ill-equipped in terms of skill, attitude and confidence to produce high quality performance.  They moreover mistakenly believe that the people who paid for their education must also find them jobs and pay their salaries as though it is a constitutionally enshrined right!  Getting a bigger slice of the budget-pie without a comprehensive review of the current allocation regime would amount to flushing more good money down the tube.

FUTA, saddled though it is with salary-fixated, self-serving members, is amply endowed with intellectual resources to see beyond trade union action.  The Government must recognize and make use of this political moment to engage in the broader and vital discussion on the comprehensive overhaul of education policy.  If either party plays brinkmanship, it would be an opportunity lost and this fact will not be lost on the people who probably will give up on both, to the larger detriment of the country.

The Nation Editorial