SHIRANI NOT WILLING TO VACATE POST?

January 14, 2013

Despite being served notice of removal from the office of Chief Justice, political sources say Dr. Shirani Bandaranayake has no intention of leaving the post and has even called on police to tighten her security.

It is said that she has requested for heightened security, as the “Chief Justice,” in a letter addressed to the Inspector General of Police via her attorneys.

Sources say that Bandaranayake has decided not to vacate her post, as the Supreme Court has already declared the impeachment and its report illegal.  

Ada Derana reliably learnt that Shirani Bandaranayake will proceed to sit in the judge bench which is set to hear cases next week.

It is said that Bandaranayake’s name has already been included in the judges registry informing the remainder of the judges that she will serve as the chairperson of the Supreme Court judge bench sitting on January 15 and 17.

According to the proposed judges registry, judges P.A. Ratnayake and S. I. Imam along with Shirani Bandaranayake have been appointed to the chief judge bench that will preside over cases scheduled to be taken up at court 502 on January 15, sources said.

 Justice Chandra Ekanayake and Justice Sathya Hettige have been named in addition to Bandaranayake for the Supreme Court judge bench sitting on January 17.

It is also reported that if a new Chief Justice is appointed, several organizations and religious leaders are prepared to file several cases with the Supreme Court challenging the decision. 

However, the Parliamentary Council is slated to meet today to appoint a new Chief Justice. After the Chief Justice is removed constitutionally, it is the duty of the Parliamentary Council to recommend a successor to the President.

The name of the new Chief Justice will be proposed by the President to the Parliamentary Council, which in turn will recommend the person and forward it to the President. The President will then approve the name for the post of Chief Justice.

 Speaker Chamal Rajapaksa serves as the Chairman of the Parliamentary Counsel while Prime Minister D.M. Jayaratne, MP A.H.M. Aswar, Opposition Leader Ranil Wickramasinghe and MP DM Swaminathan are its members.   

Police security for Shirani withdrawn

Monday , 14 January 2013

Government has removed the police protection given to Chief Justice Prof.Shirani Bandaranayake from yesterday is according to information.

 Consequently Chief Justice Shirani Bandaranayake has forwarded a letter to Inspector General of Police mentioning that there is threat to her safety and to provide sufficient protection.

Meanwhile Government has given a notification to Chief Justice Shirani to immediately evacuate the official residence of Chief Justice.

Impeachment which was passed with two third majority in parliament was signed by President Mahinda Rajapakse and later the police security provided to Chief Justice was removed.

“You are removed from the Chief Justice position was mentioned” and a letter was forwarded by President Mahinda Rajapakse to Chief Justice Prof.Shirani Bandaranayake.

Meanwhile the judiciary is seriously considering in taking action against the new appointment of Chief Justice is according to sources.

.

Attorneys’ argument is, government is functioning antithetical to the constitution in the issue of impeachment.

 Meanwhile International community is seriously observing the activities processed by the government against Chief Justice. 

Impeachment Highlights Key Role Of Judiciary

By Jehan Perera -January 14, 2013 

Jehan Perera

President Mahinda Rajapaksa has acted swiftly after the impeachment of Chief Justice Shirani Bandaranayake by Parliament to issue a Presidential decree that removes her from office.  This letter has been delivered to the Chief Justice.  However, there is considerable support from the legal fraternity that she remains Chief Justice regardless of the Presidential letter.  This is on account of a Supreme Court ruling that the impeachment process was not in conformity with the law.  A group of leading lawyers has said, “The Lawyers Collective categorically reiterates that Hon. Dr. Shirani Bandaranayake remains the Chief Justice, notwithstanding being unconstitutionally removed.”  What will eventually transpire in the days ahead is unclear.

The impeachment has polarized the political parties in Parliament.  The division of votes in Parliament was on party lines with only the government members voting in favour of the impeachment.  But there were also signs of cracks within the government coalition.  For the first time since President Rajapaksa assumed office a handful of MPs, numbering five, did not vote along with their compatriots but chose to abstain.  These included Prof. Tissa Vitarana who headed the All Party Representatives Committee that formulated a political solution to the ethnic conflict at the height of the war.  Others included the leader of the Communist Party, D E W Gunasakera and Liberal Party leader ProfRajiva Wijesinha who has been one of the most eloquent defenders of the government on other controversial matters.

There is also a horizontal divide within the population at large.  The government may still be able to convince the rural masses of the people about its position on the impeachment and its theory of an international conspiracy through the government-controlled propaganda machine.  This accounts for the absence of mass mobilization on the issue of the impeachment. However, the urban intelligentsia appears to be united in opposition to the impeachment.   There is no ethnic polarization on the issue of the impeachment as there was on the issue of the war. There is no independent professional, religious or civic organization that has been supportive of the impeachment.  All these groups have issued statements either condemning it or urging the government to step back.

GOVERNMENTAL ANXIETY

President Rajapaksa’s decision to sign the removal decree contradicted his assurance some weeks earlier that he was considering an alternative to acting immediately on the report of the Parliamentary Select Committee.   The President said that he was considering appointing an independent committee to advise him on the next steps.  This was in the context of the Appeal Court and Supreme Court taking the position that the findings of the Parliamentary Select Committee were a nullity in law.  The appointment of an independent committee to advise the President would have given a breathing space, and cooling off period, in which there could have been sober discussion about the possibilities of a compromise solution.

The President’s decision to go ahead with the removal of the Chief Justice in hasty circumstances can be best explained in terms of the insecurities felt by the government leadership about a zero-sum game, in which one side must lose all.  After the government and judiciary collided it has became virtually impossible for either side to back down.  If the government had backed down, it would have given the judiciary the opportunity to take action on a number of outstanding issues, including instances of corruption, abuse of power and even regarding human rights violations that took place during the war.  On the other hand, having ruled that the impeachment process is outside of the law, the judiciary also cannot accept a process that gets rid of its head in an extra-legal or illegal manner.

An issue that could be causing considerable anxiety to the government is the assertion by the UNP that it would go to the courts and take legal action against those MPs who won election on the UNP ticket on the proportional system, and later crossed over to the government side.  In reality they no longer represent the voters who once voted for the opposition. Earlier Supreme Court decisions denied the right of the UNP to sack their members who crossed over to the ruling party.  This enabled the Government to obtain a two-third majority in Parliament. The UNP has now taken the position that these crossover MPs violated a party call to vote against the impeachment.  A newly assertive Supreme Court, conscious of the grave harm that this artificial two thirds majority in Parliament gives, may take steps to remedy this situation. The loss of the 16 crossover MPs would deal a major blow to the government and strip it of its 2/3 majority which it has been using to steamroll its way in the political decision making.

MOB RULE

The most important feature of a democratic system is the integrity of its institutions.  The government decision to override decisions of the Supreme Court at its discretion, will lead to the judiciary becoming another administrative department of the government to carry out its decisions rather than go by the intrinsic merits or otherwise of the matters in issue before them. In this context there is an increasing fear that Sri Lanka may be heading towards a failed State situation where there is no Rule of Law or supremacy of the Law and the Constitution.  Sri Lanka is therefore in a constitutional crisis even though most people in the country may be unaware of this.

Already mobs have celebrated the impeachment outside the Chief Justice’s residence.  Earlier mobs with clubs in their hands also threatened and assaulted protesting lawyers and civil society activists in the presence of the police who stood by. Photographs of these ugly incidents were published in the media. There is cause for grave anxiety that the ground is being laid for non-democratic processes to gain strength. It is ironic that in attempting to decapitate the Supreme Court, by removing its head, the importance of the judiciary as a check and balance on the abuse of power has also been revealed. If the legitimacy of the national judiciary and Rule of Law is not speedily restored, the case will grow stronger for international judicial interventions in the internal affairs of the country.

There may be no doubt that life in Sri Lanka in general has improved after the end of the war for which the government can claim credit.  However the undermining of public institutions is bound to make this improvement unsustainable in the longer term.  Where the Rule of Law breaks down, it is inevitable that mob rule will eventually prevail.  It is reported in the media that the President had approached several eminent legal personalities and even sitting judges to take on the position of Chief Justice, but so far without success.  TheBar Association has decided not to welcome any new Chief Justice appointed under these circumstances.  It would be judicious if the President were to try and get a consensus amongst all political parties and the Bar Association regarding the future of the judiciary.

The National Peace Council expresses its grave anxiety that the ground is being laid for non-democratic processes to gain strength

Where the Rule of Law breaks down, it is inevitable that mob rule will eventually prevail ( Goons assault pro democracy protesters)

National Peace Council---MONDAY, JANUARY 14, 2013
The Sri Lanka Parliament vote to impeach the Chief Justice has been in total disregard of the judicial decision by the country’s two highest courts- the Supreme Court and the Court of Appeal that the findings of the Parliamentary Select Committee have no basis in law and are invalid. Now this extra-legal process of impeachment awaits the President’s final decision. However, the power of interpretation of the Constitution lies solely with the Supreme Court. 

The decision of the Supreme Court means that the Chief Justice is legally entitled to hold office, notwithstanding the Parliamentary vote. The legal fraternity has said they will not accept a new Chief Justice appointment under these circumstances. The National Peace Council hopes that the President’s decision will be a wise one, and in accordance with the Constitution as interpreted by the Supreme Court, which every elected person in the two organs of State have sworn to uphold. 

The impeachment of the Chief Justice by Parliament is the culmination of the process ushered in by the 1978 Constitution by using the two-thirds majority that the government has in Parliament. The denial of the right of the UNP to sack their members who crossed over to the ruling party alone enabled the Government to obtain a two-third majority in Parliament. But this action has nullified the entire rationale for democracy under a Proportional Representation system of Election. It has vitiated the claim that our elected Parliament represents the free choice of the people and represents their voice. These MPs who crossed over do not represent the people, or any People’s Mandate, but only themselves at best. 

When the Supreme Court decided on the issue of crossovers, and later approved the 18th Amendment which further concentrated power in the Executive Presidency, it ought to have borne in mind the precarious balance of power and ought to have realized that changes of this nature change the essential structure of the Constitution and as such the very nature of our democracy. The MPs who crossed over gave the Government the two third majority to enact laws like the 18th Amendment which violates the fundamental principles underlying democracy and has substituted a government of politicians for politicians by politicians instead of government of the people for the people by the people, which is the foundational principle of democracy. 

The most important feature of a democratic system is the integrity of its institutions. Parliament is the institution vested with law making powers. But it cannot interpret the laws, which is the task of the judiciary. It is noteworthy that the government passed the controversial Divineguma bill in Parliament after taking into account the Supreme Court’s judgment. 

On the other hand, it is being arbitrary and selective in choosing not to accept the ruling of the Supreme Court in the case of the impeachment of the Chief Justice. Can the Parliament pick and choose which Supreme Court decisions it will accept and which it will not? This can have adverse consequences as there are other controversial decisions made by the Supreme Court, such as the de-merger of the Northern and Eastern Provinces, which may be contested in a similar manner in the future by those who do not accept this decision on the grounds that it runs counter to the 13th Amendment and who may quote this precedent and refuse to recognize this Supreme Court decision. 

The government decision to override the decision of the courts at its discretion, will lead to the judiciary becoming another administrative department of the government to carry out the decisions of the Executive which appointed the Superior Court Judges who would be expected to comply with the wishes of the Executive rather than go by the intrinsic merits or otherwise of the matters in issue before them. We do not believe that there can be said to be justice in such a situation where Judges merely carry out the wishes of the Executive.

Even after Parliament passes a law it has to be interpreted by the Supreme Court – a power granted by the Constitution only to the Supreme Court. If it does not, it can be struck down regardless of the wishes of the majority of the people. This is the only way to protect the rights of the ethnic and religious minorities granted by the Constitution. It is at a democratic check and balance essential for the preservation of personal freedom and the Rule of Law. The failure of the Parliament to accept the Supreme Court will we hope not be followed by the Executive Presidency the other organ of the State. If these two organs of the State disregard the interpretation and rulings of the Supreme Court the way would be open for an autocracy. This opens the door to an unjust State without law but operating on the arbitrary decisions of the Executive. We fear that the country is heading towards a failed State type of situation where there is no Rule of Law or supremacy of the Law and the Constitution. Sri Lanka is therefore in a constitutional crisis even though most people in the country may be unaware of this. We hope mobs will not take the law into their own hands and terrorize the Chief Justice and force her to quit by unlawful mob violence. 

There may be no doubt that life in Sri Lanka in general has improved after the end of the war which the government can claim credit for. However the undermining of public institutions is bound to make this improvement unsustainable in the longer term. Where the Rule of Law breaks down, it is inevitable that mob rule will eventually prevail. Already mobs have celebrated the impeachment outside the Chief Justice’s residence. Earlier they also threatened protesting lawyers in the presence of the police who stood by. The National Peace Council expresses its grave anxiety that the ground is being laid for non-democratic processes to gain strength, and calls on the government to find an alternative to the process currently underway. If the legitimacy of the national judiciary and Rule of Law is eroded, the case will grow stronger for international judicial interventions in the internal affairs of the country

CJ: People’s Judgement On Your Stand Against Tyrannical Regime Is Absolutely Inspiring

By Vishvamithra -January 14, 2013 

Hon. CJ, just disregard the disgraceful disinformation campaign launched by the Rajapaksa corrupt regime. Simply concentrate your constitutional obligation to the people in a broader perspective i.e.  to respect and uphold the rule of law and the will of the people, that is being ridiculed and insulted by the Rajapaksa regime that effectively made Sri Lanka a FAILED STATE in the eyes of the international community. Informed individuals of this country are fully aware of the circumstances that led the impudent Rajapaksa regime to launch this impeachment process against you. Had you simply allowed the amendment to the CPC that permitted the police to keep the citizens who have been taken into custody for 48 hours in the cells, violating their civil liberties enshrined in the constitution. And if you hadn’t declared the Divineguma bill that provided one individual, Basil Rajapakse, enormous power and control over public finance of billions of rupees, surely then you would not faced this extremely serious situation, risking your own life.

At the same time, remember that people also are well aware of your weaknesses, like allowing the18^thamendment to the Constitution that gave sweeping powers to the Executive President. The irony is that you yourself became the first victim of your own failure and now entangled in the blunder you made.

Yet, the people of this country is prepared to pardon you because you are just another human are bound to make mistakes and at this crucial hour the people cannot think of any other strong individual with total integrity to uphold the office of the CJ and effectively discharge the role of the watchdog of the people.

Therefore, remember that you are not alone. The people have already sacrificed their own security and safety, assuring the protection of your interests. Hope that you had witnessed as to how the criminals employed by Rajapaksa regime mercilessly attacked Mr Thilak Kariyawasam, the President of the Environmental protection agency, who exercised his legitimate right and challenged the sham impeachment. The unfolding of recent events only portray the imminent and ominous end of the Rajapaksa era. The people would demand resignation of President Rajapaksa, his brother Gotabaya and the IGP and the impotent opposition leader, all of who had failed to discharge of their duties effectively as required by law. All these people have absolutely failed in their duty to uphold the rule of law by aiding and abetting criminals to silence the non-violent protest launched by the people against the regime that openly undermined the rule of law. And their conduct is utterly condemned by right-thinking people.

Watch the following video clip. This sump ups everything that qualifies Sri Lanka to be declared a FAILED LAWLESS STATE. This along is surely good enough to abandon the Commonwealth head of the state meeting scheduled in Colombo this year, which President Rajapaksa wittingly or unwittingly asking for.

Sri Lanka lawyers fight impeachment of chief justice
(AFP) / 14 January 2013

Sri Lanka’s lawyers on Monday announced a legal challenge to the impeachment of the chief justice and vowed to keep up a battle for judicial independence.

The Lawyers’ Collective, which includes most of Sri Lanka’s 11,000 attorneys, said they would also contest through the courts any appointment to replace Shirani Bandaranayake after her sacking on Sunday by President Mahinda Rajapakse.
Bandaranayake, Sri Lanka’s first woman chief justice, was removed despite a succession of court rulings which declared the impeachment process to be unconstitutional.
“We will use all legal avenues to challenge this purported impeachment,” Lawyers’ Collective spokesman J. C. Weliamuna told reporters in Colombo.
Lawyers said they expected a plethora of cases to be filed in courts when they reopen after a long weekend on Tuesday. Monday is a Hindu religious holiday in Sri Lanka.
Bandaranayake’s lawyers said she had no immediate comment.
“The government wanted her out because she remained independent and did not do their bidding,” Weliamuna said. “This is not a matter that affects only her and the legal fraternity but the democratic rights of all citizens.”
Rajapakse brushed aside international calls for restraint and sacked Bandaranayake who would have had another 11 years in office.
The government’s senior legal advisor Mohan Peiris and the senior-most judge of the supreme court Shiranee Tilakawardane are among frontrunners to replace Bandaranayake. An appointment is imminent, official sources said.
The main opposition United National Party has also rejected the sacking while the Commonwealth, the United States and Britain have expressed concern over the impeachment as a blow to rule of law and good governance.
The government maintains that it followed a constitutional process and denies it was politically motivated.
Lawmakers found Bandaranayake guilty of tampering with a case involving a company from which her sister bought an apartment, of failing to declare dormant bank accounts, and of staying in office while her husband faced a bribery charge.

Rizana And Shirani: Adoption Of “Presumption Of Guilt”

By Kamal Nissanka -January 14, 2013

Kamal Nissanka

Two events occurred during the second week of January 2013 shocked the Sri Lankan as well as the international community. Both events were related two Sri Lankan daughters. One was an under educated minor, from a poor, rural background of Muttur, Trincomalee who was sent to do domestic service in Saudi Arabia and other hailed from Kurunegala , educated  at Anuradhapura, Colombo and London was the 4th citizen of Sri Lanka ,destined to become  the first woman chief justice of  the island. Both were fallen victims of ‘unfair trials’ based on the legal principle of “presumption of guilt”

Ms.Rizana Nafeek of Sri Lanka who was born on 4th of February, 1988(Sri Lanka’s Independence Day) was an underage girl at the departure to Saudi Arabia. She was sent to Saudi Arabia to work as a house maid on a forged passport that had included a wrong birthday by Sri Lankan government authorities.

The state of Saudi Arabia is not a democracy, governed by sharia law and decrees of the king.

According to Wikipedia

“In Saudi Arabia, a judge is empowered to disregard previous judgments (even of his own) and will apply his personal interpretations of ‘sharia’ to any a particular case. Traditional tribal law remains significant. In this country judge and lawyer are part of “ulema”, the country’s religious leadership. Those arrested are often not informed of the crime of what they are accused of or given access to a lawyer and are subject to   ill-treatment and torture if they do not confess. At trial there is a presumption of guilt and accuse did often unable examine witnesses and evidence or present a legal defense. Most trials are held in secret”.

“Death sentence in Saudi Arabia imposed for various crimes by way of beheading, stoning, and shooting, even by crucification.   Only three countries in the world including Saudi Arabia impose death sentence to children”

At the age of 17 Rizana had to look after a three year old baby and feed him. It is alleged that the death of the infant had occurred as a result of chocking while feeding milk from a bottle. She had been taken to police and had been asked to make a statement under duress and there was no Tamil translator to make things clear at the police.  The statement was a forced confession.  She was physically assaulted to sign it. There was no post mortem for the body of the child who died and no evidence regarding a medical report has emerged. Her birth certificate clearly shows that she was a minor, but there was no lawyer to assist her at various stages. Finally she was convicted and held for years in the death row, Sri Lanka and number of International agencies wanted to get her released on the ground of minority but all the attempts were in vain and to our dismay Rizana Nafeek was beheaded publicly  on the 9^th of January 2013 in Saudi Arabia the birth place of Islam, reminding us the beheading of Madduma Bandara, the child hero nearly two centuries ago for a wrong committed by his father, Ehelepola  Maha Adikarama, in the city of sacred tooth relic.

The gruesome killing of Rizana raises lots of issues. Many countries, human rights organizations and international organizations   vehemently condemned the inhuman punishment.

During the same week on Friday the 11^th  depending on the  Parliamentary Select Committee report that has been quashed by the Court of Appeal  by way  of a writ of certiorari on the basis of an earlier constitutional interpretation of the Supreme Court regarding non application of ”Standing Orders’ to impeach a superior court judge. The government parliamentary group passed the said illegal impeachment making noises on a self imposed concept of “parliamentary supremacy” which is alien to our existing constitution.

As in the case of Rizana, considerable  pressure  was mounted  by Bar Association of Sri Lanka, Judges Association, International Bar Association, Commonwealth Bar Association, International Commission of Jurists  , diplomatic missions, opposition political parties, social organizations and individuals on the Sri Lanka government to withdraw the  flawed impeachment of  Dr.Shirani Bandaranaike , Sri  Lanka government  adopted its own “sharia law” to get rid the chief justice, while the apex court had declared it null and void.

As in the case of Rizana, Dr.Shirani  Bandaranayake  also faced a trial indoor( in camera). She was insulted by the “judges” , threatened by  supporters of those judges on her way to Diyawanna court house  and back, finally encircled her official residence , uttered abusive words ,prepared “milk rice” ,a symbol of triumphalism in the mindset of Sinhalese. As  in the case of sharia law , she was not informed who the witnesses were, not allowed  to cross examine , no time was given to go through the 1000 odd papers, no opportunity  was given to  forward a  legal defense . Dr Bandaranayake  was found guilty by a “court” which has no jurisdiction to try her as declared by the Court of Appeal and Supreme Court of Sri Lanka. The court at least did not allow the 117 prosecutors or complainants to prosecute the case against Dr.Bandaranayake. There was no “proved misbehavior” as shown in the constitution but “judges” adopted the  uncivilized, uncultured , barbaric sharia law , “principle of presumption of guilt” demanding Dr. Bandaranayake to disprove the presumption. Now she is destined to be publicly beheaded by way of removal from office. Both Rizana and Shirani were victims of flawed systems.

Mass protests in London condemning assassination of Kurdish activists in Paris

[TamilNet, Monday, 14 January 2013, 02:01 GMT]
Thousands of Kurds from across the UK took to the streets in London on Sunday condemning the recent assassination of three Kurdish women activists in Paris. Demanding a proper inquiry and immediate justice for the brutal murders of Sakine Cansiz, co-founder of the PKK, and activists Fidan Dogan and Leyla Soylemez, the protestors raised slogans of ‘”Turkey is a terrorist state” and “We want freedom”. Kurdish sources told TamilNet that the assassination was an attempt to sabotage the Kurds desire for peaceful negotiations and France should act soon, lest it portrays itself complicit by inaction. Large protests were also held in France and Germany on Saturday. These protests saw the participation of solidarity groups and Eezham Tamil activists, who had joined to convey their solidarity with the Kurds. 

Sakine Cansiz, a founding member of the Kurdistan Workers Party (PKK), was found shot dead along with two other Kurdish women activists, Fidan Dogan, Paris Representative of the Kurdish National Congress, and Leyla Soylemez, political activist working as women’s representative on behalf of the PKK, in execution style murders inside the Information Centre of Kurdistan, Paris in the early hours of Thursday. 

Besides the participation of grassroots Kurdish organizations, the protests also saw the involvement of solidarity groups like the Turkish Marxist-Leninist Communist Party (MLKP) and others. 

The protest, which began as a march from Halkevi Centre, Dalston Lane, culminated at the Kurdish Community Centre, Haringey, with numerous Kurdish activists and others speaking to a massive gathering.

Condemning the assassinations as an attack on the Kurdish nation’s desire for peace, the Kurdish speakers unanimously called on the French government to expedite the process of investigation and justice. 

Noting how the ‘terrorist ban’ on the PKK was used as an excuse to clamp down on Kurdish activism in the West, Margaret Owen, OBE, Barrister, called for the delisting of the PKK, contending that it was not a terrorist organization. 

Dr. Andy Higginbottom, Principal lecturer in Politics and Human Rights at Kingston University, speaking for Colombia Solidarity, said that refugees have the right to organize free from fear of repression or murder. He further asked why the French government seems to have given impunity to assassinations of activists. 

Tamil youth activist Sasithar Maheswaran and research scholar Karthick RM also spoke at the event, conveying solidarity with the Kurds on behalf of the Tamils. 

Mr. Sasithar noted the similarities between the Paris assassinations of Eezham Tamil grassroots activist Parithi in November 2012 and that of the three Kurdish women activists, further criticizing the French government for its lethargic approach in dealing with such grave crimes. He opined that the ban and criminalization of organizations like LTTE and PKK encouraged such assassins to act with impunity. 

Mr. Karthick, who said that France was becoming a safe haven for rogue states to murder activists working for peace, justice and freedom, urged for a strengthening of bonds between the Kurds and the Tamils. The deaths of the three Kurdish women activists will not intimidate, but will only strengthen the Kurdish nation’s desire for freedom, he opined. 

The protests by the Kurdish diaspora in Germany and France also saw participation from Eezham Tamil activists. 

Colombo’s military establishment steps up psyop war on Eezham Tamils

[TamilNet, Saturday, 12 January 2013, 23:32 GMT]
The Sri Lankan “Terrorist” Investigation Department (SL-TID), which had summoned Mr Sivagnanam Sritharan, the Tamil parliamentarian from Ki’linochchi, to Colombo Police Headquarters in June 2012 to grill him on his interviews published in diaspora and Tamil Nadu media, was first looking to frame the parliamentarian as someone who had violated the 6th Amendment to the Sri Lankan Constitution. Three months later, the police bodyguards provided to him from the Ministerial Security Division were withdrawn by Colombo without any explanation. On Saturday, the SL-TID entered the office of Mr Sritharan alleging that they had information on explosives. Later, they “discovered” 300 grams explosives inside the kitchen allegedly after “planting” the evidence. Two of the TNA activists, working at Sritharan MPs office, were subjected to interrogations. 

The TNA parliamentarian has categorically denied the allegations that have been framed against his key activists. 

Mr Sritharan, standing on a democratic platform, has been raising his voice against the SL military oppression, despite the threats and harassments against him.

On December 12, 2002, a number of Tamil girls, who had been coerced to join the SL military’s ‘civil positions’ and later conscripted to military training, were admitted at Ki’linochchi hospital in mentally affected state. 

The TNA MP was giving interviews exposing the nature of the conscription and the health condition of the victims. 

Later, when Medical Officer Shivashankar was detained by the SL military for having voiced for the rights of a girl who was taken away from the family after a leave to sit for GCE O/L exams, the parliamentarian voiced against the behaviour of the SL military. 

On Friday, a former LTTE member, identified as Vasanthan, who was arrested in Kurunakar in Jaffna for the possession of explosives, allegedly for dynamite fishing. 

The SL-TID was twisting the context. 

Further, Mr Vasanthan has not been working with the TNA parliamentarian after the election campaign, according to Mr. Sritharan. 

On Saturday, the TID operatives stormed the office of the parliamentarian without securing permission in advance from the SL Parliament Speaker, violating the protocol of the SL parliament, and “discovered” 300 grams of explosives, allegedly after planting it inside the office. 

The TID has detained 38-year-old Arunachalam Velamaalithan, who was at the office of Mr Sritharan. The Administrative Secretary, 36-year-old Ponnambalam Ladchumykanthan was released after interrogation inside the office. 

In the meantime, the SL-TID is waging a psyop war stating that there were explosives, pornographic material and condoms. The TID has also seized two laptop computers.

Waking up to migrant employment through Rizana Nafeek

Waking up to migrant employment through Rizana Nafeek

Groundviews ‏-Kusal Perera-14 Jan, 2013

Much is written on Rizana Nafeek’s extremely unfortunate fate in Saudi Arabia (SA). Some written with anger let loose on the government and some on licensed agencies and every one else who could be dragged in. But to discuss SL migrant labour, one has to leave emotions aside and start off with a factual explanation of what this whole issue is.       Image via BBC

An extremely deprived, poor Muslim family from Muttur, decided to find some stability to their living by sending their 17 year old eldest daughter for employment in the Middle East. In 2005 the salary would have been around LKR 16,000 (USD 150) per month and that for them would have been substantial. The Sri Lanka Bureau of Foreign Employment (SLBFE) does not approve House Maid (HM) applicants below 30 years for SA. At least in Sri Lanka the only instance when young girls agree to declare their age above the actual age is, when they want to migrate to SA as House HM. But for sure, this poor girl from remote Muttur, Rizana Nafeek, would not have even known, her passport was made with a false date of birth to get SLBFE approval. That’s when hapless parents are held responsible too for the misfortunes of their under aged children.

There are networks operating for good money that provide valid p.ports with altered details included. Well, it is a matter of feeding data to the computers at the Immigration Department that can be deleted if necessary, after the issue of the p.port. This therefore is nothing knew in the HM trade, where “Sub Agents” who are not legally bound to the SLBFE are employed on commission by the licensed foreign employment agencies to recruit HMs. Each year, over 100,000 HMs are recruited and leave to the Middle East (ME) after approval from the SLBFE. They now come from rural backgrounds, mostly from Wayamba and the East. At any moment, there could be over 900,000 SL migrant employees in the ME, not counting those who have more or less settled in some countries for very many years and have not been returning regularly. ME, according to SLBFE statistics have at an average, 90% of the total SL migrant labour. For every HM so recruited and sent, the licensed agency gets a “Dollar commission”, that often is not credited to local banks. Such a trade one must accept, can not be clean, decent and human.

The case of Rizana thus raises many issues, apart from what is done at Training Centres regulated and maintained by the SLBFE. Before they are sent for training, they are sent for a “medical test” that has only to confirm the prospective HM is not pregnant and has no sexually transmitted diseases and is “fit for work”. The possibility of medically asserting the actual age, is not included. If that was included,  Rizana’s age could have been raised and questioned, provided the Medical centres used for such medical screening are professionally honest. At the training centre,  trainees have to submit photo copies of their p.port and the National Identity Card (NIC) to the training centre. Where the p.port has altered date of birth, it carries no NIC number as there is a provision to issue p.ports for those who have lost or not had a NIC at the time of applying for the p.port, to be endorsed for a “single journey”. I do not know for sure, what the SLBFE does in such cases, when a trainee comes without her NIC but only a valid p.port.

Yet a 15 day training where the batches are not large batches, where personal interactions between the lady Trainer and the female trainees are not very restricted, it should not be impossible to guess or doubt the age of a “17 year old” teenager, what ever the documents provided, have in them. Therefore, there was every chance for the SLBFE Trainer to note Rizana was a minor and send her back to the Approval Division of the SLBFE for a second check, when she was presented for training. If such is not possible during training, then the SLBFE has to introduce a system where the trainee would be providing actual information at a direct interview. All major city schools do this. They collect from Grade 1 pupils the actual addresses of residence a few days after the schools begin, because all applications for school admissions to such popular schools have addresses around the school wall, bought for money to ensure admissions.

Migrant employment certainly has more serious issues than what most discuss around the Rizana Nafeek case and argue on. Let me list them to begin with.             Continue reading ...

Mervin to be made Ambassador?

Minister Mervin Silva has made a special request from President Mahinda Rajapaksa. He has asked to be removed from his ministerial portfolio and the Parliamentary seat to be appointed as an ambassador to a foreign country.

The minister has made this request after the situation that cropped up with the murder of the Member of Kelaniya Pradeshiya Sabha.

The Minister had further said that he was prepared to face any investigation and to hand over the post of organizer of Kelaniya electorate to Minister Basil Rajapaksa.

The President has made no response yet for the request made over the phone state sources in Temple Trees.