What Really Was Blake Saying?

By Namini Wijedasa -September 16, 2012

Namini Wijedasa

A top US official passed through Sri Lanka last week with a fresh dose of pressure on everything from the business environment and elections to accountability and demilitarisation.

Significantly, this is US Assistant Secretary of State Robert Blake’s last visit to Sri Lanka before the US presidential election. An observer of US-Sri Lanka relations commented that it was interesting to note how, even three-and-a-half years after the war ended, the US remains engaged on Sri Lanka.

“I am surprised at how, even with so many other problems around the world, a consistent level of US engagement on Sri Lanka continues,” he said, requesting anonymity. He also pointed out that there is likely to be a change in officials at Washington, regardless of whether or not President Barack Obama wins.

“Blake has been leading interactions on Sri Lanka, maintaining continuity from the time he was ambassador and throughout his tenure as assistant secretary of state,” he pointed out. “That’s a good six years. It would be interesting to see whether US interest in Sri Lanka will continue in the same form and manner regardless of the outcome of the US election.”

It is learnt that Richard Armitage, former US deputy secretary of state, was also in Sri Lanka earlier this month on a low profile visit. His business website ‘Armitage International’ states that he was here as ‘Convener of the Non-Official Group of Friends of Sri Lanka’. He led a seven-member delegation to meet with civil society organisations and political parties. Details of discussions were not available.

The key issues                                                                                     Read More

SRI LANKA: Disappearance of land titles among other frauds

The Asian Human Rights Commission (AHRC) wishes to bring to the attention of the Sri Lankan public that we have learned about the massive frauds relating to tampering with land titles and also other frauds by the misusing the criminal justice process by way of fabrication of charges.
The incidents narrated hereunder would explain the nature of fraud that is taking place on land titles, by the removal of District Land Registry documents from the land registrar's offices. The cases will also reveal, how by unscrupulous manipulation of false charges on innocent people, some massive frauds are taking place.

For reasons of security, the AHRC has withheld the names of the persons who were directly victims in these stories. However the incidents are real and have taken place recently.

Story 1
Upali (1) is a businessman who owns land in a reasonably important area in Galle. He has owned about 40 perches of land, which is his family property for over 80 years. As is becoming more common these days some unscrupulous persons made a false deed and registered it in the District Land Registry for this same land. Upali (1) is unaware of this registration. The newly registered owner sold the land to a company dealing in real estate. This company was requested by a politically powerful family who is trying to develop a big project in the area to find land for them. The company sold several pieces of land including that belonging to Upali (1) to the family.

When the project tried to take possession of the land they discovered that Upali (1) is the legitimate owner of the land but claimed that they were the lawful owners. The company who sold the land to the project was questioned about this issue. It was only at that point that the company found out that the deeds of the person who sold the land was falsely registered and that the lawful owner is Upali (1). The politically powerful family who are the owners of the project placed the matter before the Ministry of Defence who questioned the company about the complications of the transaction.

The company, on the one hand, tried to negotiate with Upali (1) offering a certain amount of money for him to vacate the land and hand it over to the company so that it could in turn, hand it over to the project. On the other hand the company explained to the Ministry of Defence about the complications involved and Upali (1)'s resistance to hand over the land.

While the company was involved in this difficult process tried to correct the mistake they had made in buying the land from the person who had the falsely registered deed and at the same time please the politically powerful family by trying to obtain vacant possession of the land, they explained the complications to the investigators from the Ministry of Defence.

While the negotiations were ongoing between Upali (1) and the company one day he went to a public event and there, two uniformed officers who arrived in a white van arrested him. They told a family member of Upali (1) who was present that they were taking him to a particular police station. Later, members of Upali (1)'s family went to that police station only to be told that there had been no such arrest. The police further stated that they had no information on Upali (1)'s whereabouts. They then contacted the employee of the company who had led the negotiations and learned that the Ministry of Defence was making enquiries about the land and the complications. He also said that he was unable to do anything about this matter and that it was being handled by big people. He was a small man, he told them and it was out of his hands.

Two years have passed since the disappearance of Upali (1) and to date, no one knows his whereabouts. He is considered to be a disappeared person. The family members who are still trying to find Upali (1) are harassed and threatened to give up their enquiries. Eventually they had to flee the country for their own security.

Whatever the claims or land titles that Upali (1) once had are lost and the politically important family has now become the owners of the land as well as other lands which are being used for the project.

Story 2

Read More...

The anatomy of a regime:

Unstoppable in elections, dysfunctional in governance, indefensible against protests

September 15, 2012

by Rajan Philips

There cannot be much disagreement about how to read the current political situation. On the one hand, the government continues to be unstoppable at elections notwithstanding its discontents. On the other hand, protests are becoming unstoppable regardless of the government winning elections. There is a clear standoff between the Rajapaksa regime and its growing detractors. Missing in action are the once potent political parties.

The United National Party is defanged and is permanently divided. The Old Left, the springboard for protests past is now the dead Left buried inside the UPFA. Despite being the main governing party, the Sri Lanka Freedom Party is a different family party within the UPFA. The party of the Bandaranaikes and the Pancha Maha Balavegaya is now the party of the Rajapaksas and the enemy of the new manifestations of the old five forces. The children of 1956 seem to have come home to roost, though not quite the same way and for not quite the same reasons. There is more.

A monster of contradictions                          Full Story>>>

A Cartoon’s Footprint

By Sanjana Hattotuwa - September 17, 2012

Sanjana Hattotuwa

The Network of Women in Media, India called it “a new low point for misogyny in the print media”. The Women and Media Collective said that it had allowed “for gross sexism and crudity to override any form of civility in journalistic communication” and that it was “derogatory to women and women politicians”. The focus of this outrage was a cartoon, published a week ago ina leading Sunday newspaper, depicting Tamil Nadu’s Chief Minister Jayalalitha with sari hitched up, gesticulating at Sri Lanka. This by itself would have been fine, were it not for the depiction of India’s Prime Minister, Dr. Manmohan Singh, directly under her hitched sari, looking up with consternation.

By Monday, as such things quickly become in Sri Lanka, the furore had turned into farce. On Sunday night, the official Twitter accounts of the Indian External Affairs Ministry’s spokesperson, the Indian PM as well as some of the most influential activists and leading journalists in India had picked up on the cartoon or were directed to it (and through them, party officials of Jayalalitha’s AIADMK as well). There was unequivocal condemnation. The Acting Editor of the newspaper the cartoon was published in wrote two tweets in its defence, though because of sheer syntactic incompetence, key interlocutors on Twitter didn’t see these tweets at the time. The two tweets were followed up by a longer, more reasoned defence of the cartoon on Monday, published online and in print. The Acting Editor asserted, inter alia, that vulgarity was subjective and that the cartoon only carried a “subtle sexual connotation”. He ended by flagging the jail term meted out to cartoonist Aseem Trivedi in India as a marker of growing intolerance in that country. Perhaps the attempt was to enhance his paper’s artistic credo. It failed to convince, not just many in Sri Lanka, but his own paper’s management. While the staunch defence of the cartoon and inviolable principles of free expression were postulated by the Acting Editor, the newspaper’s management had quickly, and it appears, without informing the Acting Editor, deleted the cartoon off its online edition

To date, the Acting Editor has not explained why his take on the Freedom of Expression isn’t shared with his paymasters, or more generally, why newspaper owners in Sri Lanka, without any Editorial oversight, have near total control over published content.

The cartoon is already a case study for students of journalism. No doubt, a healthy debate will ensue over the merits of the cartoon’s publication in journalism schools and elsewhere. Your columnist, by carefully delineating the initial responses to the cartoon on Twitter in an article published online earlier in the week, observed some remarkable trends.

One, the speed with which information flows on Twitter alone defies critics who suggest new media has no power to influence national, regional and international agendas. There were two key inflection points in the Twitter debate – one when it was first flagged by a leading Indian correspondent, two when outrage over it was re-tweeted by a well-known Indian Tamil activist. The original tweet was from a marginal voice, but re-tweeted by this leading activist to her network, the outrage spread like wildfire.

Two, mainstream media in Sri Lanka and especially our foreign service simply do not understand the nature of social media and how to engage in real time with official accounts of elected officials, diplomats and other influential voices, especially over contentious issues. Social media is, to them, an extension of broadcast media – say whatever to scatter wherever. We are supremely ill-advised and inept to deal with new media’s interactivity, impact and influence. Voices, both in Sri Lanka and abroad that are more agile and shrewd, and not always better informed, distinctly have the upper hand.

Three, the complete absence of the Sri Lanka Press Institute and the Press Complaints Commission from online debates over the cartoon. They are not on, do not follow and do not understand social media. Both are, sadly, institutional anachronisms. Ironically, even Sri Lanka’s censorious government is more acutely aware of the reach and potential of new media. Section 6.3 of Code of Professional Practice (Code of Ethics) adopted by the PCC avers that “a journalist shall not knowingly or willfully (sic) promote communal or religious discord or violence”. The cartoon in question, in print and online, risked precisely this, across two countries. Yet your columnist was informed the PCC, privately, did not find this cartoon in violation of its ethical code. This would be to effectively mandate outright misogyny and sexism as perfectly acceptable in political lampooning.

Four, and importantly, new media erases geography. The cartoon was meant for Sri Lankans. It offended globally. Greater common-sense and media literacy, rather than censorship, is called for.

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

Plans To Call For An Independent International Accountability Mechanism

By Mandana Ismail Abeywickrema-Monday, September 17, 2012

Amendments to a US House of Representatives’ resolution on Sri Lanka calling on the Sri Lankan government, the international community and the United Nations to establish an independent international accountability mechanism to look into reports of war crimes, crimes against humanity, and other human rights violations have been tabled before the House last week.
One of the amendments to the resolution state that the Lessons Learnt and Reconciliation Commission (LLRC) report has failed to adequately address issues of accountability for both the government and the  Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam, for credible allegations of war crimes and crimes against humanity.
However, the amendments have called on the Government of Sri Lanka to build on its establishment of the Lessons Learnt and Reconciliation Commission (LLRC) and that Commission’s constructive recommendations on issues of paramount importance to Sri Lanka be implemented in a credible, transparent, and expeditious manner.
The amendments have been proposed to resolution No. 177 titled “Expressing support for internal rebuilding, resettlement and reconciliation within Sri Lanka that are necessary to ensure a lasting peace.” The amendments have been tabled before the House on September 7.
Representative Michael G. Grimm presented the resolution on March 17, 2011, which was cosponsored by 53 members.
The resolution was referred to the House Committee on Foreign Affairs on March 17, 2011 and referred to the Subcommittee on Middle East and South Asia on March 29, 2011.
Following is the amended resolution presented to the House of Representatives:
(1) Calls on the Government of Sri Lanka to build on its establishment of the Lessons Learnt and Reconciliation Commission (LLRC) and that Commission’s constructive recommendations on issues of paramount importance to Sri Lanka in a credible, transparent, and expeditious manner;
(2) Recognizes that the LLRC report failed to adequately address issues of accountability for both the government and the terrorist Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam, for credible allegations of war crimes and crimes against humanity;
(3) Urges the Government of Sri Lanka, the international community, and the United Nations to establish an independent international accountability mechanism to look into reports of war crimes, crimes against humanity, and other human rights violations committed by both sides during and after the war in Sri Lanka and to make recommendations regarding accountability;
(4) Encourages the Government of Sri Lanka to allow for greater media freedoms and humanitarian organizations, journalists, and international human rights groups greater access to the war-affected, including rehabilitated ex-Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam cadres, and those detained;
(5) Acknowledges the end of the war and calls on the Government of Sri Lanka to go through a process of demilitarization throughout the country; and
(6) Acknowledges the importance for parties to reach a political settlement on the meaningful devolution of power. Meanwhile, US Assistant Secretary of State Robert Blake who visited Sri Lanka last week said that he discussed the need for accelerated progress to implement the recommendations of the LLRC and the National Action Plan.
“I emphasized the importance of progress in reducing the role and profile of the military in the North, and full respect for human rights,” he said.  On issues of accountability, Blake said the US hoped that three years after the end of the conflict, there can be a credible and transparent accounting, investigation and prosecution of some of the outstanding and serious allegations of human rights violations, as well as progress on the missing.
“I also urged that the Northern Provincial Council elections be held as soon as possible and encouraged an early resumption of talks between the TNA and the government to agree on powers to be devolved to the provinces,” he said.

The Limits Of International Pressure

By Jehan Perera -September 17, 2012

Jehan Perera

The last fortnight has seen several important international visitors to Sri Lanka.  These have included a large number of Parliamentarians from Commonwealth countries who attended the meeting of the Commonwealth Parliamentary Association in Colombo.  The Sri Lankan government took this opportunity to present its side of recent history and post-war developments to the visiting dignitaries. Delegations of the Parliamentarians were taken on well organized visits to different parts of the country, including the north and east.  Media reports indicate that many of them were impressed by the normalcy they witnessed as well as the economic development of the former war zones of the north and east.

Two other important visits of a more critical bent also took place during this period.  One was the visit by US Undersecretary of State Robert Blake and the other was the visit by a three member team from the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights.  During his visit, Undersecretary Blake expressed his hopes and aspirations for the country, including the resumption of government-TNA dialogue on a political solution, the holding of Provincial Council elections for the Northern Province and the implementation of the recommendations of the Lessons Learnt and Reconciliation Commission.  Most of the issues he raised were ones taken up by the LLRC in its report, and included the issue of investigations into alleged human rights violations in the course of the war.

The visit of the three member UN team was more on a low profile.  This visit followed the resolution of the UN Human Rights Council in Geneva in March 2012 by a majority vote.  The resolution called on the Sri Lankan government to implement the recommendations of the LLRC and also to obtain technical assistance from the UN especially with regard to issues pertaining to the alleged violations of international law in the course of the war.  The UN High Commissioner for Human Rights is expected to report back on the progress in respect of the implementation of the UNHRC resolution in March 2013.  The coincidence of the Blake visit with the UN team’s visit was marked, especially as it was the United States that had sponsored the resolution over the strenuous opposition of the Sri Lankan government.

INCREASED CONFIDENCE                                 Read More

Govt. needs to be more transparent— Dr. Roberta

Dr. Roberta Blackman-Woods who led the British delegation to the Common wealth Parliamentary Association Conference on Friday called for greater transparency on the part of the government with regard to issues of re-development and reconciliation.

 “I think the government needs to be more open and transparent about what has been done and what is left to be done  and be more confident in their own ability to deliver,” she told the Daily Mirror.

She echoed the statements by the US and called for the reduction in the military presence in the North. “I do think there was heavy military presence there. I think it needs to be reduced and the whole situation needs to be stabilized, with some sense of devolution of power and responsibility to local people there. I think that has to happen,” she said.

Dr. Blackman-Woods said countries should not be given the option to opt out of attending the Commonwealth Heads of Government Meeting (CHOGM) to be held in Colombo next year. “I personally think that is unfortunate. I suppose you have to always give people a choice about attendance, but I think it should be discouraged,” she said.

She also agreed with the Britain’s travel warning towards on Sri Lanka, after having appraised the situation here for herself. “I think that is an issue that needs to be discussed between the two governments and some proper understanding needs to be arrived at. I think the two governments need to use their diplomatic services to resolve the issue,” she said. (Dianne Silva)

Sri Lanka banks on cricket to cleanse bloody image

Yahoo 

Sri Lanka is banking on cricket to repair the damage to its blood-stained image after the brutal end to a 37-year ethnic war as it stages the biggest tournament in the nation's post-independence history.

Since declaring an end in 2009 to a conflict that claimed up to 100,000 lives, President Mahinda Rajapakse's government has had to battle accusations that its troops killed thousands of civilians as they crushed Tamil rebels in the finale.

But as hosts of the World Twenty20, which begins Tuesday in Rajapakse's hometown of Hambantota, Sri Lanka is looking to rebrand itself as an island of sun-kissed beaches and ancient Buddhist temples rather than as a hotbed of conflict.

"The T20 World Cup programme will provide an excellent platform to endorse the new Sri Lanka brand during the next three weeks," said Nivard Cabraal, the central bank governor and a key figure in promoting Sri Lanka as a sporting destination.

"I am confident that this trend will continue in the future, and those so-called international calls for (war crimes) investigation will fade away," he told AFP.

Teams from 12 nations, including those from Australia and England -- two nations which have been highly critical of Sri Lanka's government -- are taking part in the World Twenty20, which will culminate in the final in Colombo on October 7.

It is the first time Sri Lanka has been the sole host of such a major tournament and underlines its progress since the height of the conflict between government troops and the Tamil Tigers, a group notorious for audacious suicide bombings.

In 1996, when Sri Lanka co-hosted the 50-over World Cup with India and Pakistan, Australia and the West Indies stayed away from their qualifying games on the island for fear of attacks. Sri Lanka went on to win the trophy.

It once again co-hosted last year's 50-over World Cup with India and Bangladesh, but lost the final to India in Mumbai.

Sri Lankan authorities have often turned to the cricket team as an example of ethnic unity in the face of allegations that Tamils were discriminated against by the majority Sinhalese community.

The country's most famous player, record-breaking spinner Muttiah Muralitharan, is a Tamil -- albeit often the only one in the team before he retired last year.

Tiger rebels fought for outright independence for Tamils concentrated in the island's northern and eastern regions, but they were eventually defeated in a no-holds-barred onslaught in May 2009.

The United States led a resolution against Sri Lanka at the UN Human Rights Council in Geneva earlier this year and Colombo had been given another year to come up with a road map to address accountability issues.

Cabraal says economic progress in the former conflict zones are testimony to reconciliation in a country that recorded growth rates of 8.0 percent for two years running after the end of fighting.

"An enormous amount of development activity is taking place in the former conflict areas," Cabraal said.

"If there were war crimes... this type of reconciliation and progress would have never taken place."

But moderate Tamil legislator Suresh Premachandran said Sri Lanka's emerging sporting credentials did not address the grievances of his minority community.

"Some Tamil youngsters may be happy about cricket and the Twenty20 tournament, but it won't do anything to address the core issues," he told AFP, referring to Tamil demands for greater political autonomy.

Last year, Sri Lanka also narrowly lost to Australia in its bid to host the 2018 Commonwealth Games, but it is pitching for several other Asian tournaments as part of its drive to become a major sporting destination.

Charu Lata Hogg, a Sri Lanka expert at the London-based think-tank Chatham House, believes the government will struggle to turn the spotlight off its tainted record.

"Hosting an international sporting event will not deflect international attention on its core human rights responsibilities," she told AFP.

"Attention on the issue of war crimes investigations, is unlikely to cease until there is a genuine effort by the Sri Lankan state to establish accountability."

Her remarks were underscored by a top US diplomat who declared on Friday that there were "questions" about Sri Lanka's commitment to probe serious violations of human rights during the final offensive and thereafter.

"There are lot of questions now about how quickly Sri Lanka is really committed to moving ahead on these things," Assistant Secretary of State Robert Blake told reporters in Colombo.

Blake, the top US diplomat for South and Central Asia and a former ambassador to Colombo, said he had asked for "accelerated progress" in reconciliation and urged de-militarisation of former war zones as well as power sharing with the Tamils.

American Diplomats Paid The Price With Their Lives

American diplomats paid the price with their lives For Israeli Jewish film producer’s  crime

By Latheef Farook –September 17, 2012

Latheef Farook

The United States Ambassador in Libya J Christopher Stevens, together with three other US citizens, all employees of US consulate in the Libyan city Benghazi, had paid the price for a crime committed by an American- Israeli Jewish film maker Sam Bacile.  Stevens, a career diplomat who assumed office as U.S. ambassador to Libya last May had previously worked   in Libya including Benghazi during last year’s uprising.

Christopher Stevens was killed following California based Sam Bacile’s blasphemous film called “Innocence of Muslims” insulting the Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) in the most despicable manner. Inflaming the situation Bacile who described this as a political movie to help Israel, also boasted that he wanted exactly the type of backlash to further demonize Islam.

In the summer of 2011 Bacile, together with an American based Egyptian Coptic Christian, wrote, directed and produced this two hour film involving 59 actors and about 45 people behind the camera at a cost of five million dollars, financed by more than 100 Jewish donors. It appears most actors and others involved were not aware of the theme of the film.

Muslims worldwide love their final Prophet, Muhammad (PBUH), more than their lives in the same way they love earlier Prophets such as Jesus, Moses, Ibrahim and all others. Thus ridiculing other religions and hurting the feelings of their followers have never been part of Islamic culture throughout its more than fourteen century history.

On the other hand calculated provocations of Muslim are not something new. For example a Danish newspaper’s publication of 12 caricatures of the prophet Muhammad in 2005 triggered riots in many Muslim countries. The journalist behind the cartoons was a Ukrainian Jew, operating under the name of “Fleming Rose” with close working relations with the Israel’s far right forces.

In another incident “Van Gogh, a Dutch film-maker, was killed in 2004 after making a film     insulting Islam. Columnists James Petras and Robin Eastman pointed out that ‘the center piece of the   explosive confrontation between the Muslim world and the US and Western European regimes   are rooted in Israeli efforts to polarize the world in its favor.

Read More

Premadasa threatened war with India, says former envoy
Sep 17, 2012

New Delhi, Sep 16 (IANS) Then Sri Lankan president Ranasinghe Premadasa threatened to go to war with India in 1989 if Indian troops were not pulled back, the then Indian high commissioner in Colombo has revealed.

Lakhan Lal Mehrotra has told Indian Foreign Affairs Journal that Premadasa held out the sensational threat when he called on the president at his Colombo office.

The president told Mehrotra that if India did not agree to withdraw its military, he would announce on state-run television that Sri Lankan forces had taken charge of the country’s north and east.

“And then if the IPKF (Indian Peace Keeping Force) resented, there would be hostility and war,” Mehrotra quoted him as saying.

Mehrotra reportedly replied: “Excellency, I have come here to discuss peace with you, but if you want war you will have it.”

He added in the journal’s Oral History column: “These words, delivered in a very serious manner, brought him down. I was observing him keenly; he was not expecting that kind of reply.

“He was virtually shaking and could not speak for a minute or two.”

Other Sri Lankan leaders, including the late Ranjan Wijeratne, who was the foreign affairs minister, suggested to Mehrotra that he should calm down.

Mehrotra said he told Wijeratne that he always stood for peace but the president seemed to only think in terms of war. “In that case we should part company and face the consequences.”

Mehrotra says that at one point earlier, Premadasa also threatened to abrogate the 1987 India-Sri Lanka Agreement under which the Indian Army was deployed in the island’s northeast to end Tamil separatism.

Premadasa reportedly said that he did not care if there was a rupture in diplomatic relations between India and Sri Lanka.

He also said he would declare Indian troops in his country an occupation force and it would hurt New Delhi’s reputation.

Mehrotra says he told the president: “We will take care of our reputation.”

The president then angrily retorted: “It will cost me my political future and your next visit will be for my funeral!”

Mehrotra says: “These were the exact words he used.”

In a tumultuous time for India-Sri Lanka ties, India deployed its troops in Sri Lanka’s northeast under a 1987 bilateral pact. The agreement was signed by then president J.R. Jayewardene of Sri Lanka and then prime minister Rajiv Gandhi of India.

But Premadasa, who was then Sri Lanka’s prime minister, never accepted the 1987 agreement. When he became president in late 1988, he pledged to send the Indian troops home.

In June 1989, after entering into talks with the Tamil Tigers, he publicly demanded that India take back its troops by July 1989, causing a diplomatic furore.

After intense backroom discussions in which Mehrotra played a major role, India eventually pulled back all its troops by the end of March 1990.

Mehrotra, however, says that once Premadasa realized that India would be taking back its military, he hugged Mehrotra and praised his diplomatic skills. Mehrotra also quoted the late Jayewardene as telling him that while he did not trust the Tamil Tigers, Premadasa “will learn his own lessons”.

The Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE) eventually assassinated not just Rajiv Gandhi but also Premadasa and Wijeratne. The Sri Lankan military crushed the LTTE in May 2009.

Another disfigured body recovered in Jaffna ashore

[ Sunday, 16 September 2012, 05:03.03 PM GMT +05:30 ]

Another completely disfigured body of an unidentified man recovered from ashore at Mankumban beach at Jaffna Velanai today, area sources said.

Police ecovered disfigured body of a man from the area last evening and once again they found another body at the shore today. Kayts police arrive the locations hold further investigations this regard. Fishermen engage fishing in the Jaffna sea stated they did not face any threats in the mid sea. In such situation area residents raise questions about these bodies.

UN singles out 16 countries, including Bahrain, for government reprisals against critics.

Home

Anja Niedringhaus/Associated Press - UN High Commissioner for Human Rights Navi Pillay delivers her speech at the Human Rights Council side-event on Syria at the United Nations in Geneva, Switzerland, Monday, Sept. 10, 2012. U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon urged before the world’s foremost human rights body to keep up the pressure on major powers to end the civil war in Syria and outbreak of human abuses there.

By Associated Press, Published: September 13

GENEVA — The United Nations has singled out 16 nations for cracking down on critics, saying most of those countries’ governments are going unpunished for their acts of reprisal.

U.N. High Commissioner for Human Rights Navi Pillay told a special session of the Human Rights Council that the 16 nations detailed in a new report “have been far from sufficient” in preventing members of their own governments from resorting to intimidation and attacks on various activists.

“Reprisals and intimidation against individuals continue to be reported,” she told the 47-nation council. “People may be threatened or harassed by government officials, including through public statements by high-level authorities. Associations and NGOs may see their activities monitored or restricted. Smear campaigns against those who cooperate with the U.N. may be organized. Threats may be made via phone calls, text messages or even direct contacts. People may also be arrested, beaten or tortured and even killed.”

Pillay said there also has been a “lack of accountability in relation to the majority of reported cases of reprisals.”

The report to the Geneva-based council for its session this month details alleged cases of killings, beatings, torture, arrests, threats, harassment and smear campaigns against human rights defenders, some arising out of backlash from the Arab Spring last year. The report covers mid-June 2011 to mid-July 2012 and cites cases in Algeria, Bahrain, Belarus, China, Colombia, Iran, Kazakhstan, Kenya, Lebanon, Malawi, Rwanda, Saudi Arabia, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Uzbekistan and Venezuela.

A Colombian man who reportedly witnessed the execution of several civilians said, for example, that he was subjected to death threats and beatings after reporting it to U.N. officials, and then was threatened on a street in Baranquilla in May a day after he met with a UN official.

“What were you doing with the U.N. woman yesterday?” the man said he was asked.

One activist, Mohammed Al-Maskati, told the council Thursday that as president of the Bahrain Youth Society for Human Rights he had “received more than a dozen anonymous phone calls threatening my life and the safety of my family” during the previous three days because he tweeted that he would be attending the council session.

Bahrain’s human rights minister, Dr. Salah Bin Ali Abdulrahman, told The Associated Press that “we are serious about issues related to human rights principles” and that any reported allegations of such abuses are investigated.

“I am willing to investigate any cases if there is some evidence or documents regarding reprisals,” he said in an interview.

“It’s important for us, if there are any reprisals or violations happening to anybody, individuals or citizens, we have a full judicial system, fully independent,” said Abdulrahman, who is a family practice medical doctor, adding that activists are raising the issues more outside the country than within it. “If anybody is being violated or threatened, they should report that in Bahrain.”

The country’s unrest, part of the Arab Spring, began in February 2011 when its Shiite majority began an uprising demanding a greater political voice in the Sunni-ruled country, which is home to the U.S. Navy’s 5th Fleet.

Abdulrahman said the country’s series of reforms, including giving more powers to the elected parliament, holding open dialogues and educating people about their rights, would eventually include most measures recommended by its own and the U.N.’s reviews.

Pillay urged the council — and the world’s nations — to do more.

“We need more coherent and solid strategies to put an end to reprisals,” she said. “Reprisals are not only unacceptable: they are also ineffective in the long term. Preventing people from expressing their will or their dissent freely, does not succeed. Ultimately, freedom will always prevail. And information will always find its way to the outside word.”

Copyright 2012 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

Sri Lanka’s excuses at UN Panel Discussion
15 September 2012
Speaking at the 21st session of the UN Human Rights Council earlier this week, Sri Lanka delivered revealingly weak excuses at a Panel Discussion on Intimidation & Reprisals.

Discussing the topic of intimidation and reprisals against individuals and groups who cooperate or have cooperated with the UN in the field of human rights, a field of infamous expertise for Sri Lanka, the Sri Lankan delegate told the council,

“One must not lose sight that rights can bear fruit only when it is exercised with sensitivity to the accompanying duties”

“In this context Sri Lanka is concerned that the council has increasingly witnessed the disturbing strength of unsubstantiated and uncorroborated allegations being used for political purposes by certain sections of the international community and NGOs to seek to name and shame specific countries.”

With its notorious reputation for freedom of expression, Sri Lanka also said,

“States cannot at the same time be held responsible for any comments and references made in the independent media against such persons or entities, which would be tantamount to an interference with the freedom of expression.”

They must have conveniently failed to recall an article published on The Official Government News Portal of Sri Lanka on the 17th of March 2012, naming several human rights activists and accusing them of “working with the LTTE rumps to conspire against their own motherland.”
See Sri Lankan NGO activists work with LTTE rumps in Geneva - The Official Government News Portal of Sri Lanka (17 Mar 2012)

See Sri Lanka’s  statement at 2 hours 19 minutes.


Meanwhile Lawyers Rights Watch also gave a statement at the discussion, with Ms Vani Selvarajah telling the council,

“Unfortunately, despite several calls for action, a number of states continue to engage in reprisals against human rights defenders- among these countries are Bahrain, Malawi, Sri Lanka and Sudan.”

“Elsewhere, human rights defenders in Sri Lanka face a climate of fear, intimidation and threats. The space for free expression and association has been severely restricted by government legislation requiring NGOs to obtain government clearance for all gatherings and activities. Similarly, news websites covering Sri Lanka have been ordered to register with Sri Lanka’s information ministry, after officials stated that a number of websites had already been blocked for engaging in “character assassination” of the President.”

“This intimidation has followed activists to Geneva, as human rights defenders in this very building have been directly approached by members of the Sri Lankan delegation and told that, “they should not be in Geneva.” They also faced violent threats from government ministers and media in Sri Lanka. 

One Minister pledged to “break the limbs” of journalists and human rights activists who advocated for the UNHRC resolution that passed this March. Lawyers’ Rights Watch Canada commends these human rights defenders who have courageously chosen to return to Geneva and are with us here today.”

“LRWC calls on the Council to systematically condemn and respond to harassment and intimidation against human rights defenders. Without their work, the objectives and even the existence of this very Council are endangered.”

See the full statement here and at 2 hours 33 minutes on the video.

Hambantota dairy farmers affected by Ishara’s Albesia project

Sunday, 16 September 2012

Parliamentarian Namal Rajapaksa has given 1,500 acres near the Yala sanctuary to the head of LOLC, Ishara Nanayakkara to plant Albesia, this is used as a raw material to generate thermal power.

The Albesia plantataion has been initiated in this fertile soil in order to get the necessary supply of raw materials for a thermal power project belonging to Nanayakkara and a Chinese company.

The land in question had been a grassy land that was used by dairy farmers in the area to feed their cattle. However, the commencement of the Albesia project had dried up the land leaving the cattle without any food. A large number of families that depend on dairy farming in the area have been adversely affected by the project.

When the dairy farmers had requested for a meeting with the persons behind the Albesia plantation, LOC Head, Nanayakkara had assured the farmers that they would be provided with imported grass to feed their cattle.

The LOLC Chairman has however failed to honor his promise and the helpless farmers have not sought the help of the media to explain their plight.

Nanayakkara had immediately called his marketing manager, Susan Bandara and had prevented media reports from being published about the matter by bribing journalists.

An editor of a weekly national newspaper had been taken recently by Bandara on a tour in the area. It is learnt that the editor and his family had spent the weekend at the Peacock Beach Hotel on the expense of LOLC.

The editor had stopped the article on the dairy farmers as a token of gratitude to LOLC.