Select Committee disallows request for time by CJ for filing answers: Ravaya restrained
(Lanka-e-News -16.Nov.2012, 
11.30PM) The Select Committee for hearing the impeachment motion which met today on the second round decided against granting the request made by the Chief justice (CJ) asking for time to file answers. It had instructed that she should appear before the Select Committee at 10.00 a.m. on the 23rd., according to unofficial sources.

The Co. of Lawyers appearing on behalf of the CJ had sent a letter requesting six weeks time to file the answer. The representatives of the Govt. party argued that , since the Lawyers for CJ had not addressed the letter of request signed by the CJ , and a letter by the CJ which vests powers in the Lawyers Co. to make the request had not been forwarded , as decided, the CJ should appear on the 23rd before the select Committee at 10.00 a.m. , the same sources revealed .

The Select Committee decided that the CJ can appear on the 23 rd , and ask for time to file the answer , and she can nominate her representatives. 

On the first day when the Committee met , when it was held by the Govt. party that only one representative can appear on behalf of the CJ , the opposition raised fierce objections. The opposition representatives pointed out that previously there was no such restriction , and more than one representative can appear on her behalf.
The Committee which met today accepted that stance. Accordingly, she can have a team comprising more than one representative to file answers to the charges.

A crucial issue which took center stage at today’s select committee sessions was regarding the reports to the media. While the inquiries and discussions by the Select Committee should be in camera by law , the Ravaya newspaper splashing front page headline news on the discussions held on the first day sparked a storm. In this connection , the Speaker is expected to warn the Ravaya newspaper or summon its Editor and issue a warning tomorrow. Indeed , the Speaker warned in Parliament this noon that , when expressing views during the discussions on the impeachment the Parliament rules shall be abided by.

Impeachment: A Host Of Questions Can Be Raised

By The Civil Rights Movement -November 16, 2012 

Chief Justice

A host of questions can be raised following recent events regarding the Chief Justice of our country. A survey of developments involving the independence of the judiciary can go way back to the 1972 Constitution, to the de facto sacking of judges by the 1978 Constitution, the summoning of Supreme Court Justices Wimalaratne and Colin Thomé before a Select Committee of Parliament, the attempted impeachment of Chief Justice Neville Samarakoon, the physical attacks against and killings, in a later era, of lawyers and litigants engaged in fundamental rights cases. Subsequently came the allegations levelled against Chief Justice Sarath Silva and the moves to impeach him. Along with disappointment at the content of several judgments of the Supreme Court (among which are that relating to the Eighteenth Amendment) many lawyers and laymen alike have watched with dismay the conferring of state benefits and positions on family members of judges and on retired judges. Most recently we have had the events concerning the Magistrate’s court of Mannar, the conflict between the Judicial Services Commission and the President and the physical attack on the judge holding the position of Secretary of the JSC.

These are all matters of importance and should not be disregarded by anyone concerned about the independence of the judiciary in our country. However they do not, in the view of the Civil Rights Movement (CRM), affect the question of immediate urgency which is addressed below.

The action against the present Chief Justice

Charges have been framed and widely publicized against the current Chief Justice, and proceedings to remove her from office have been commenced. (In this context the term “impeachment” simply means the process of removal from office). The procedure is to be inquiry by a Select Committee of Parliament. The question we raise is both the constitutionality and the appropriateness of this procedure.

When similar proceedings were commenced against Chief Justice Neville Samarakoon in 1984 CRM in a telegram to the Speaker said:

The proposal is unconstitutional as it violates the concept of the independence of the judiciary which is part of the basic structure of our Constitution. The actions of such a Select Committee would be ultra vires the powers of Parliament as they are not ancillary to the exercise of legislative power. Parliament has no judicial power (except in respect of its own privileges). Parliament enjoys no supervisory function over judges, in respect to whom its power is limited to removal from office for proved misbehaviour or incapacity. Such misbehaviour or incapacity has to be proved by proper procedure as envisaged by Article 107 of the Constitution. It follows that any inquiry must be by an independent judicial tribunal similar to that provided under the Judges Inquiry Act of 1968 in India. In Sri Lanka no such procedure has yet been created. … The fact that so far this machinery has not been provided does not justify parliament resorting to unconstitutional methods which in effect undermine the independence of the judiciary.
[emphasis added]

The argument on constitutionality                             Read More

SRI LANKA: Is impeachment a synonym for beheading?

Contributors: Basil Fernando-November 16, 2012

In May 1993, a UN sponsored election was held in Cambodia to elect a government. The country had faced a civil war after Polpot's catastrophic revolution. At the time, a large part of the country was under the State of Cambodia, of which Hun Sen was the head. His party was one of the two leading parties that contested the election, the other being led by Prince Ranariddh, the son of the former king, King Sihanouk. A day or two after the election, while the ballots were still being counted, a rumour began to be spread that Hun Sen’s party had lost the election (it was proved true when the results were announced) and that now the loser, Hun Sen, would be publicly executed.

That was how people understood the result of losing an election and in Sri Lanka, at the moment, the attempted impeachment of the Chief Justice is conveying many such surprising meanings.

One perception seems to be that it is more or less like a beheading, and that the beheading will take place at the parliament.

A beheading assumes that the issue of guilt or innocence is no longer relevant. It is only the final ceremony that is left to be carried out.

Perhaps what has given rise to that perception is that an impeachment is assumed to be a political affair.

In political affairs, it is assumed that what matters most is what the leader who can muster most votes really wants or thinks. His supporters have only one function: that is to vote in the manner that they are told to vote.

S.L. Gunarasekara, who was himself a Member of Parliament once, writes this on how MPs vote now:

Vast numbers of Members of Parliament "simply voted 'for' or 'against' according to the decisions taken by the leadership of his/her party......The 'bottom line' in this regard is the most unpalatable fact that independent thought and the expression of independent opinions by its Members are, to the leadership of any Party, as taboo as pork is to a Muslim or a Jew. The harsh reality about our political system is that 'thinking' is the exclusive preserve of the leadership of the Party and that acting in consonance with such 'thinking' and the decisions based on its is a mandatory obligation of all its Members and Members of Parliament in particular of any Party."

Since voting in parliament is assumed to be happening this way, it is natural to conclude that no thinking is expected in the parliament regarding the impeachment. All that would happen is the execution, the beheading.

However, such perception fails to take into consideration the Parliamentary Select Committee (PSC) function, which is in fact to decide on the issue of guilt of innocence.

That raises the issue as to whether a decision of guilt and innocence can be a political decision?

If the answer to that question is yes, then it would follow that, as the members of party are expected to vote according to what their party leader wants, the impeachment would involve no process of judging, and therefore it would indeed be a beheading.

This simply means that someone other than the leader of the party that moving the impeachment motion should be the judge. The PSC cannot do that function for the reasons stated above.

Those who judge on the issue of guilt and innocence have to be impartial and impartiality assumes freedom to make decisions. It follows then that judging on guilt and innocence cannot be a party political act.

This being so, it appears that the view of the 'impeachment' of the Chief Justice as a synonym for beheading is correct in the Sri Lankan circumstances.

What The Hell Can Sri Lanka Do If The UN Staffers Did Not Want To Carry Out Their Job? – Asks President’s Media Head

By Colombo Telegraph -November 16, 2012 

“What the hell can Sri Lanka do if the UN staffers did not want to carry out their job? asks Lucien Rajakarunanayake, Director, Policy Research & Information (PIRU), Presidential Secretariat.

Lucien

That is just one question, the other important one is what the hell were they doing, if  without reporting any so-called or alleged intimidations to Ban Ki-moon and  so many of his other officers and associates in the UN, and other UN bodies,  who were frequent visitors to Sri Lanka at the time?   Or even reveal these soon after they left the turns of duty in Sri Lanka? Why the hell did they not tell this story about themselves to the Darusman trio who were on a so-called fact finding probe about Sri Lanka’s defeat of terrorism for the same Ban Ki-moon?”  Lucien Rajakarunanayake further says.

Writing to Isalnd he says; “where are all these UN staffers now? Do they still hold the same positions or have they been promoted. If so it a payoff for being silent all this while, or is it a recognition of the good they did for themselves, as they now claim,  of making sure of their promotions by being silent? But how can Sri Lanka be blamed for these faults of the UN staffers in Colombo?”

We below reproduce his article in Full;

Who’s the hero in the BBC scandal? Come on, how do you get a hero in scandal? Do you mean the villain of the piece?

No, I mean the hero…we know that the main villain is the late Jimmy Saville, – Sir Jimmy, with knighthoods from the Queen of England and the Pope in Rome. How can you get a hero in a scandal as big as this – all about paedophilia, with two persons arrested already and police inquiries on 200 plus allegations?

Well it might surprise you, but one can have heroes even in such situations. There can be people who stand above others even in what must have been a hell hole of paedophilia and widespread child abuse.

They must be having to a lot of internal hunting to find such a hero in Bush House and other locations, especially when it now appears very clear that a helluva a lot of Jimmy Saville’s child abuse took place within the studios and other rooms of the BBC.  The hunt won’t be easy with his former colleagues, fellow paedophiles, and others who looked the other way when all of this took place, trying to hide themselves from the multiple probes that are now on.                                 Read More

Colombo accelerates demographic genocide in Trincomalee

[TamilNet, Friday, 16 November 2012, 18:33 GMT]
The Colombo government led by President Mahinda Rajapakse has been implementing a land appropriation policy to reduce the parliamentary strength of Tamils in Trincomalee district with the support of occupying Sri Lanka Army, say Tamil politicians in the district. While landless residents of the district have to fight for the allocation of half an acre per family, the outsiders brought down from south are allowed to clear forest lands 2 to 3 per acres per family. More than three hundred Sinhala families have been brought down from southern districts of the island and are allowed to clear forest area in Suriyawewa situated in Seruwila DS division at the rate of two to three acres per family. 

These families are currently clearing the forest lands with the support of the SL military. 

There was no Seruwila electorate in Trincomalee district when the country gained independence. Seruwila electorate in the Trincomalee district was carved out in 1970 after the state aided Sinhala colonization scheme carried out by the United National Party government since the British left the island in 1948. 

Earlier, there were two electorates, Trincomalee and Moothoor. Tamils and Muslims were elected to Ceylon parliament. Later a Sinhalese was elected to parliament from the Seruwila electorate.

The land appropriation policy of the Colombo government with the backing of the occupying Sri Lanka Army has also a clear agenda to reduce strength of the Tamil population in the district, weakening Tamils electoral strength in the future elections, Tamil politicians lamented.

Why did GoRa the devil incarnate transfer demonic Vaas to Ratnapura ? –Reasons hereunder (Lanka-e-News -16.Nov.2012, 11.30PM) SSP Vaas Gunawardena had been transferred forthwith from Galle to Ratnapura in order to kill the suspects who are in remand prison in connection with the Kahawatte murders , in the same way as the suspects linked to the Galle murder were shot at and murdered after being blindfolded , according to reports reaching Lanka e news. MaRa and GoRa who think that their murderous laws should prevail regardless of the rule of law and justice in the country , have plotted and planned this.  There are 9 suspects in remand prison linked to the Kahawatte murders , and it is stated that there are no witnesses in this case against them. It has been planned to abduct them after they are enlarged on bail , and kill them in the same manner as was done in Galle. The murder of four individuals near the Galle Poddala Mahason culvert reminiscent of the murders in 1988/89, after blindfolding the victims was orchestrated by SSP Vaas Gunawardena who is in charge of Galle district . It is the present OIC of the Hikkaduwa police , Dhammika Hapugoda IP who had carried out Vaas Gunawardena’s orders. Police officers of the Hikkaduwa police say this murder operation was carried out by Hapugoda jointly with STF. As soon as the SSP of Ratnapura was transferred to Galle , and Vaas Gunawardena who was at Galle was transferred to Ratnapura , Dhammika Hapugoda was appointed as OIC, Kahawatte . But as the people staged protests against the transfer of Niranjala the former OIC of Kahawatte, the latter’s transfer had to be halted. It is well to recall that when Vaas Gunawardena was the chief of the Colombo crime investigation division , his wife and son got together and assaulted a student , Nipuna , which created a storm of controversy. A human rights case is still in progress in courts in that connection. As Nipuna and family are living in Ratnapura , with the arrival of Gunawardena as SSP of that district , the whole family is in a fear psychosis. They have also written to the IGP asking for protection based on this fear.Though SSP Vaas Gunawardena is 19th in the position among others of the same rank , he is to be given first place when the six promotions to DIGs are to take place next week. In other words GoRa had maneuvered to give him the first place in the promotion list of DIGs, according to reports. Senior DIG Anura Senanayake is to go on retirement end of this month . It is learnt that GoRa the devil incarnate had planned to propel his demon henchman Vaas Gunawardena to the top by promoting him as the DIG.  Interestingly , Vaas Gunawardena recently following a dispute with his wife , tried to commit suicide by drinking a mosquito pesticide . However he managed to escape death. Usually people grieve when a person dies , but in this case, it is learnt they are grieving because he escaped death.

Silva: Quis Custodiet Ipsos Custodes?

By Asanga Welikala -November 16, 2012 

Asanga Welikala

In the context of former Chief Justice Sarath N. Silva’s recent interventions into the public debate on the controversial impeachment proceedings now being taken against the current Chief Justice, we reproduce below the Editorial of The Sunday Leader of 7th June 2009, marking the occasion of Silva’s retirement from the Supreme Court Bench. It was written by Asanga Welikala on the invitation of the then Editor of The Sunday Leader, Frederica Jansz.

Quis Custodiet Ipsos Custodes 

Last Friday, 5^th June 2009, the Chief Justice Hon. Sarath Nanda Silva P.C. retired from the Supreme Court Bench, just three months short of completing a decade in office (he was appointed by President Kumaratunga on 16^th September 1999), in what has been perhaps one of the most, if not the most, controversial tenures of a Chief Justice in the history of the Supreme Court. In almost everything he did on and off the Bench, he divided opinion deeply, combining the tactical adroitness and unprincipled cleverness of the successful advocate, with a ruthless personal ambition and a shrewd sense of political populism: in Dickensian terms, a Jaggers or a Stryver, rather than a Carton. Even in retirement, that Mr. Silva should so sharply divide opinion in Hulftsdorp as to the path he will take, between the dramatic opposites of taking to electoral politics or the life of an ascetic Buddhist mendicant, is the perfect illustration of the contention and controversy that his personality is capable of generating.

A low-country Buddhist who was educated at Trinity College Kandy, the Ceylon Law College, and the University of Brussels, Mr. Silva is a man of not inconsiderable charm and a sharp-witted intelligence, which made him one of the rising stars in the Attorney General’s Department. By the accounts of senior civil servants who sought his official legal advice, he was superlatively competent with a highly developed expertise in the wide field of public law and administration. This is borne out by his record in what was the, unfortunately premature, apogee of his professional life: his tenure as the President of the Court of Appeal. His judgments in this capacity in all branches of the law (but especially in administrative law), while certainly lacking the literary erudition of a de Sampayo, a Dias, a Soertsz, a Gratien, or a Colin-Thomé, are nonetheless luminous examples of crisp concision. Justice Silva’s use of legal first principles, without mechanical or encumbering reliance on excessive precedents, has been compared to H.V. Perera, K.C., which is high praise.                     Read More

SRI LANKA: Needs outstrip housing construction in north

Photo: Amantha Perera/IRIN

, 14 November 2012 (IRIN) - Rajina Mary, a 38-year-old widow and mother of four looks at her new home in Sri Lanka’s northern former conflict zone as if admiring a long-lost relative. But in reality, the home’s mostly unplastered walls bruise anyone who leans on them too hard, and there are large holes in the walls for non-existent windows and doors; the floor is cemented only in the living area. 

No one wants to stay indoors between mid-morning and late-afternoon because the house heats up like a furnace due to asbestos roofing sheets. 

“I need a ceiling,” Mary told IRIN without removing her gaze from the home’s skeleton. But she is still proud, knowing that she is an exception among 135,000 returnee families to be in any type ofpermanent housing - even if unfinished. “It may not be much, but it is my house. My new house.” 

In neighbouring Ambankulam village, Maheswari Selvadorai, 39, ran out of money to finish her home, which her family started building in 2009 after they left a camp for displaced persons. Her family now retreats behind the unfinished home to a shed with tin roofing and mud walls, where they feel safer. “The doors and windows are still not secure, so we sleep in the old house,” Maheswari said. 

For these two women and their families, the two-and-a-half years it took them to get into permanent housing was a relatively short period. Tens of thousands of other families are facing an indefinite wait, say aid workers. 

Donors and the government have pledged to build or repair a total of around 78,000 homes, of which the Indian government is funding 43,000. The International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies (IFRC) estimates war returnees need 170,000 homes. 

For homes financed by the Indian government future occupants receive US$3,800 in instalments, based on their construction progress. 

The spokesperson of the Indian High Commission in Sri Lanka, Birender Yadav, told IRIN the goal is to build 10,000 homes by August 2013. 

“Funding difficulties” 

But this still leaves tens of thousands in need of housing, said Mahesh Gunasekera, IFRC’s senior programme coordinator for northern Sri Lanka, which is overseeing 20,000 new housing constructions, the most of any group working in the north. “I have not come across a major project with this level of funding difficulties.” 

Gunasekera, who has worked on similar projects in Pakistan, Sudan and Nepal, calculated 129,000 homes must be constructed anew, while another 41,000 need “extensive” repairs. 

Funding trends do not bode well for housing, he added. “Even if we feel that we can secure funding for 100,000 units, we are still left with a caseload of 70,000.” 

Photo: Amantha Perera/IRIN

Welcome home in Mulaittivu District

Construction of some 21,000 homes was completed as of 30 September and was under way on nearly 4,100 others, based on the most recent figures available from UN Human Settlements Programme (UN-HABITAT). Major repairs were completed on nearly 5,800 homes. About 550 “core houses” - basic, habitable structures, which occupants can later expand - were completed. 

Returnees from India? 

The IFRC’s estimate of the north’s housing needs do not cover the some 100,000 refugees expected to return from India, said Gunasekera. 

He said IFRC expects them to return once the north reaches some level of normalcy. While not likely to happen “anytime soon”, the agency’s concern is that if and once housing is completed for current returnees, another wave will arrive. 

According to Indian government figures, there are more than 100,000 ethnic Tamil Sri Lankans in the southern Indian state of Tamil Nadu. 

“Housing has always been a top need, even before the first returns began,” said Roopavathi Ketheeswaran, the top government official in Kilinochchi District in Sri Lanka. 

Meanwhile, returnees Mary and Selvadorai are questioning whether the cost to get into their new homes is worth it. Maheswari pawned $2000 worth of gold jewellery to a local bank to pay housing contractors. (A household’s average annual income is a little over $3,200). 

Each took out $2500 in loans to supplement the $3,200 they each received from IFRC - which still turned out to be insufficient to build back to what they had before the war. 

This Sri Lanka massacre shows UN has not learned from its failures in Rwanda

Operatives allowed themselves to be bullied by a murderous gover

[Thursday, 15 November 2012 17:54]Featured, Genocide, Human Rights Articles, News

Isabel Hilton

Sri Lankan war-displaced civilians peer from behind barbed wire fences surrounding their internment camp in Vavuniya

The UN will never be a perfect  organisation: nothing so ambitious could be, and the organisation will tend to be blamed for the failures of its member states. But it has advanced many fundamental humanitarian principles, of which the responsibility to protect must count as one of the most important. Nothing can bring back the estimated 30,000 civilians who died in 2009 in the closing months of the war in Sri Lanka, but if the UN is to learn from its shocking failure to protect those civilians it must do more than mouth regrets and resolutions.

It is not the first such failure. In 2005, the UN determined that all member states share the responsibility to stop genocide, ethnic cleansing, war crimes and crimes against humanity. Since 2005, the principle has appeared in increasing numbers of UN resolutions, but this week’s reportraises serious questions about the commitment of the organisation to do more than talk. Hypocrisy is never attractive. Hypocrisy with lethal consequences is abject moral failure.

The failures detailed in the report are unequivocal: inexperienced staff, lacking support from New York, were intimidated by a government that was bent on perpetrating a massacre without witnesses. Everything the UN did connived at facilitating exactly that. Faced with government threats, they withdrew, leaving a huge, vulnerable population without recourse or witnesses.

They failed to publicise the details of the crimes and the government’s responsibility for them and to galvanise international opinion. They stood by as hospitals and refugee camps were shelled, civilians massacred and humanitarian aid withheld. They failed to fulfil the most basic requirements of their mandate.

If the words “never again” are to be more than an inscription on the gravestones of new victims, the UN must pursue this shameful episode to its roots. Its failures have enabled a triumphalist narrative  that the government of Sri Lanka continues to broadcast. Other regimes will draw satisfaction from the “success” of these scorched-earth tactics.

In 1999, the then Secretary General Kofi Annan resolved to ensure the UN never again failed to protect a civilian population, as it had in Rwanda. But failure was replayed in Darfur and Sri Lanka. The first step to restoring the UN’s credibility is to be implacable in holding the government of Sri Lanka to account. 

The UN is meant to enforce international moral authority.  It must use it to oblige the government of Sri Lanka to acknowledge its crimes and to punish those responsible. It must pursue justice and redress for the victims. And from the top to the bottom of the organisation, the commitment to protection, whatever the circumstances, must be paramount. Without that, it risks once again acting as window dressing to horror. 

UN report shows its failures to protect civilians in Sri Lanka

Posted: 15 November 2012

The United Nations (UN) failed to protect civilians during Sri Lanka’s armed conflict according its own report, released yesterday, prompting Amnesty International to renew its call for an independent investigation into alleged war crimes by the Sri Lankan army and the Tamil Tigers (LTTE).

The Report of the UN Secretary-General’s Internal Review Panel on United Nations Action in Sri Lanka, submitted to Ban Ki-moon, offers a strong indictment of the UN’s response to Sri Lanka’s armed conflict.

It deals with a period of conflict in Sri Lanka when very grave violations of international law are alleged and where effective UN action might have averted some of the worst violations.

Instead the text describes a scenario where UN officials repeatedly failed civilians they were entrusted protect, while ignoring or downplaying mounting evidence of war crimes compiled by their own staff as they struggled to appease Sri Lankan authorities intent on restricting humanitarian space.  

José Luis Díaz, Head of Amnesty International's UN New York office said:

“Unfortunately this report confirms the many troubling allegations of UN failings we have heard since the May 2009 end of the conflict.

“We hope that the report’s strong findings will help improve the way the UN and the international community protect civilians in times of conflict and reform errant relief systems.

“This report is also a wake-up call for UN member states that have not pushed hard enough for an independent international investigation into alleged war crimes committed by both Sri Lankan forces and the LTTE in the last phase of the war. The report clearly illustrates the Sri Lankan government’s lack of will to protect civilians or account for very serious violations. There is no evidence that has changed.”

The report should also help to refocus international attention on the very grave problem of impunity in Sri Lanka.

Tens of thousands of Sri Lankan civilians may have been killed through the indiscriminate actions of combatants.

Allegations that war crimes were committed by both the Sri Lankan armed forces and by the LTTE were deemed credible in an earlier report, produced by Ban Ki-moon's Panel of Experts on Accountability in Sri Lanka. It recommended an independent international investigation.

Today's Internal Review describes vividly the conditions faced by civilians and UN workers.

It details how they were trapped in the conflict region where both sides attacked civilians, but the UN suppressed information about humanitarian law violations, particularly those committed by the Sri Lankan forces.

Testimony of survivors collected by Amnesty International alleges that both sides knowingly killed and endangered civilians, and contains details about enforced disappearances of surrendered combatants by the Sri Lankan army.

Eyewitnesses say that the LTTE used civilians as human shields against the approaching army, and shot civilians who tried to escape. As its forces were depleted, it intensified conscription of child soldiers.

The Sri Lankan government declared a “No Fire Zone” and directed civilians caught in the conflict to relocate there.

Witnesses say the army shelled the “No Fire Zone”, which both the Sri Lankan army and political leadership knew was densely populated by civilians.

They hit hospitals, killing and injuring patients and staff.

More than three years later, there has been no impartial investigation into these alleged crimes under international law and no one has been brought to justice.

This failure sets a dangerous precedent, sending the message that states which, like Sri Lanka, have not ratified the Rome Statute are beyond the reach of international justice and that crimes committed in the name of “combating terrorism” can simply be ignored. 

Pakistanis charged with kidnapping two Tamils in France WEDNESDAY, 14 NOVEMBER 2012 Four Pakistanis have been charged with kidnapping and beating up two Tamils after being stopped on the motorway heading south from Paris at the weekend. The four were charged and denied bail on Tuesday night in the Paris suburb of Bobigny. They and their alleged victims were picked up by police on the A6 motorway just north of Lyon on Friday night. Although they showed signs of having been assaulted, the two Tamils, 25 and 32-years-old respectively, were jailed in a Lyon police station pending charges, according to a police source who blamed the mix-up on language difficulties. All six were later transferred to Bobigny and the Tamils freed. The four Pakistanis have been charged with unlawful detention, assault, use of a weapon and premeditation and an investigation has been launched. Paris has an established Tamil community and a growing Pakistani one. Last week Nadarajah Mathinthiran, an activist who supported the separatist Tamil Tiger movement, was shot dead on a street in the capital.(RFI)

Autonomy within unitary structure paradoxical: Peter Schalk

Peter Schalk, professor emeritus,
Uppsala, Sweden

 [TamilNet, Thursday, 15 November 2012, 14:17 GMT]

Sri Lanka’s ambassador in France, Dayan Jayatilleke, calling for “autonomy within a unitary structure,” at a seminar in Paris earlier this month was a political-populist statement, responded Professor Emeritus Peter Schalk, who participated the seminar arranged by Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique (CNRS). A unitary structure excludes autonomy. A social scientist would not have uttered such a sentence, Prof Schalk said, in a note sent to TamilNet on Thursday. Calling CNRS partial in providing propaganda platform to Colombo, he said that the violence by the governments of Lanka is structural and genocidal that is practiced over the decades and not just an occasional aberration or some nuts. 

Meanwhile, in an interview to Palaka’ni programme of TamilNet this week, Mr. Gajendrakumar Ponnambalam came out with similar views, explaining how the talk of ‘devolution of power’ under unitary structure goes against all realities in the island.

‘Devolution of Power,’ without the rejection of unitary Sri Lanka and without recognition to the sovereignty or the right to self-determination of Eezham Tamils, is a persistent chant of particularly Washington and New Delhi.

Full text of the note received from Prof Peter Sckalk:

Autonomy within a Unitary Structure?

Professor Peter Schalk

On November 7, 2012, I participated in a seminar in Paris arranged by Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique (CNRS). 

The theme was Sri Lanka and South Asia: New Challenges for a Regional Policy. I expected to get a new and deep geopolitical analysis, but we can forget about that. 

The guest speaker was Dayan Jayatilleka who was presented on the written announcement to the public as Ambassador of Sri Lanka in France, not as social scientist. He performed as ambassador. He was openly backed up by one invited scholar from the CNRS and by consenting voices from the public which was supportive. 

I have never seen before in Scandinavia, UK or Germany during my 42 years of academic service that an academic institution has invited only one party of a protracted conflict. I was baffled by the fact that the CNRS made no attempt to counter-balance the ambassador’s partiality. The chair-person just kept silent having declared that he had no competence in the subject.

The seminar in the locality of the CNRS was a propaganda meeting for the policy of the Sri Lankan Government from the beginning to the end. The ambassador came up with the usual and expected anti-LTTE attacks: The LTTE did not want to negotiate and therefore a war of total annihilation of the LTTE in the final end in 2009 was justified. 

A time consuming consenting exchange of statements took place during the seminar on the question why Tamil speakers supported the LTTE. Dayan Jayatilleke’s favourite comparison with Nazi Germany was retrieved by himself as usual. Tamil speakers’ support of the LTTE was allegedly caused by the LTTE’s terrorist methods against the Tamil civilian population. None in the seminar took up the possibility that the support by civilians of the LTTE was a result of the history of suffering by the Tamil people. Against this background they declared in 1976 that they wanted to found a separate state of Tamililam. 

The ambassador’s tirades of hate against the LTTE has taken sickly proportions and is a true obstacle to reconciliation between a large Tamil population in Paris (“La Chapelle”) and his embassy.

According to him the Sinhalas have a justified fear of the 70 millions of Tamils in South India where still the LTTE is supported. 

Indian policy was taken up several times by him, but China was only touched. 

When it came to the 13th amendment of the Constitution in which he was heavily involved in the late 1980s, he pinpointed the LTTE as cause why it has not been implemented. 

He also pointed at a “discussion” that is taking place about this amendment within the Government. 

I have heard all his platitudes and clichés many times before during my observation of the island from 1970s onwards. Therefore, I was astonished to hear him say that the 18th amendment was not good. 

A critical voice from the public, the only one, had earlier pointed out the undemocratic features of this amendment.

The history of suffering of the Tamils was no theme during the seminar. Nothing was said about the last months of the war, of Mänik farm, of the 300 000 displaced civilians, etc. 

It is not possible in the future to say “I did not know” because there is a very good documentation of structural violence against the Tamil people documented in the book Massacres of Tamils (1956-2008) issued in English in 2009 in Chennai and in German under the name of Damit wir nicht vergessen… Massaker an Tamilen 1956-2008, issued by the Draupadi-Verlag in Heidelberg 2012. A French version will be issued very soon. A Tamil version is also available. 

Realising that the violence by the Governments of Lanka is structural and genocidal being practised during decades, it is not possible to classify the present violence as an occasional aberration or as being related to some nuts only. 

The ambassador’s presentation ended with the following characterisation of the Lankan state’s policy: It strives for “autonomy within a unitary structure”. A social scientist would not have uttered such a sentence. A unitary structure (=centralised structure) excludes autonomy. But the ambassador’s point is to show that he has listened to Tamil demands for autonomy. It was a political-populist statement.

The seminar had no scientific qualifications, but it left a tragic insight that the Government represented by Dayan Jayatilleke has not learned any lesson from the past. 

Tamil man attempts suicide in detention 

By Daniel Flitton, Bianca Hall

Nov. 16, 2012

A TAMIL refugee branded a security threat by ASIO and held in detention in Melbourne has attempted to take his life, following a suicide attempt last week by another Tamil man in Sydney.

Managing arrivals from Sri Lanka has emerged as the biggest challenge for immigration authorities, with the latest boat intercepted at Cocos Island on Wednesday carrying 86 people.

It comes as international pressure builds for a boycott of the Commonwealth meeting to be held in Sri Lanka next year.

More than 5700 Sri Lankans have landed on Australian territory this year, making up more than 80 per cent of all asylum seekers who have arrived by boat.

The Immigration Department has stepped up involuntary deportation of Sri Lankans from the majority Singhalese ethnic group, including 32 on Thursday.

But the number of arrivals continues to outpace deportations and the United Nations has expressed alarm that Australia may not be adequately assessing asylum claims.

Of Sri Lankan asylum seekers already in Australia, the most difficult cases include more than 50 people, the majority Tamils, held in detention.

They have been found to be refugees - preventing them being returned home - but branded a security risk by ASIO, making them ineligible for release into the community.

About 10 men with adverse assessments are being held at the Broadmeadows centre in Melbourne. There have been several suicide attempts this year among the group.

The latest case involves a man - known as Fairfax - who has been detained since June 2009.

He was found early on Thursday morning by another detainee and taken to hospital.

with Ben Doherty-Lifeline on 131 114-beyondblue.org.au

Bandula travels to Australia in search of his love

Thursday, 15 November 2012 

Director General of the Presidential Media Unit, Bandula Jayasekera has resigned from his post and traveled to Australia to assume office as Sri Lanka’s Consul General in Sydney to make real his long time dream, sources from the Presidential Media Unit said.

Sources from the Presidential Media Unit said that Jayasekera has gone to Sydney to give up his long time game and to settle down with one of his long standing lady friends, who is the sister of a controversial tele dram actress who was killed in the 1980s.

Jayasekera had been disgruntled over the negative campaign carried out against him by his adversaries over incidents that had taken place while he was Sri Lanka’s Consul General in Toronto and the Deputy Permanent Representative in New York and also the controversy surrounding his visit to the “red light area” during the UNHRC sessions in Geneva in March this year.

It is learnt that his key adversary, Vijayananda Herath from the Presidential Media Unit is now pleased that Jayasekera has left his job and country.