Growing protest over re-demarcation in East

By Chris Kamalendran-Sunday, January 20, 2013

The Public Administration Ministry has called for an urgent meeting with parliamentarians from the Eastern Province to resolve a fresh crisis over government plans to re-demarcate boundaries of Divisional Secretaries.

Public Administration Minister John Seneviratne said that, following complaints from political parties in the East, he had called for a meeting on Thursday to look into their grievances.

On Friday, former Chief Minister Sivanesathurai Chandrakanthan’s �supporters protested in Batticaloa against moves to merge Tamil majority areas in Koralaipattu South and Koralai Pattu with Muslim majority Koralaipattu West.

Mr. Chandrakanthan is currently an advisor to President Mhainda Rajapaksa.�Arun Thambimuttu, Sri Lanka Freedom Party (SLFP) Chief Organiser for the Batticaloa District, said he had protested to the President against plans to merge Tamil majority areas with Muslim majority areas.

However, Muslim activists including those from the Sri Lanka Muslim Congress on Friday held a separate protest calling on the Government to go ahead with the re-demarcation of boundaries. The protest was held in Oddamavadi, south of Batticaloa.

The Tamil National Alliance (TNA) also has lodged a complaint with the Minister of Public Administration, under whose purview the De-limitation Committee works.�Similar issues have been reported from Trincomalee and Ampara.

Yesterday TNA leader R. Sampanthan met local council members of their party in Trincomalee to plan out moves to protest boundary changes. TNA politburo member K. Thurairethnasingham said his party was opposed to current re-demarcation proposals and would hand over its own proposals this month.

Charred body of a woman found.

Monday , 21 January 2013

A young woman's body was in a charred state was found yesterday morning at Mullaitheevu, Viswamadu locality.

The woman was identified as Tharmakula Singam Banusha aged 21 years a resident of Jaffna Sarvodaya road, Awarangal Puthur.

Many persons have seen the said woman roaming in this locality for some days is according to reports.

Public found her body in a decomposed state from the   Palmyra trees garden located at Viswamadu, 12th lane.

Public informed the police and forces regarding the incident.

Mullaitheevu police processed investigations from the incident locality yesterday afternoon and had handed over the body for postmortem to the Kilinochchi base hospital.

The story of the weeping widows

The story of the weeping widows

Shanthi Sachithanandam-21 Jan, 2013

Groundviews

It was a practical examination session for a training of gender trainers in the Jaffna district. The trainees had to conduct a day’s training on gender issues in a village called Thoppukkadu located in Karainagar. The participants were widows who were beneficiaries of a livelihood assistance project implemented by the UNDP.  Watched by the keen eyes of the examiners, the trainees began their training session.  As usual, the first formalities of a typical participatory mode-training program   were observed. The question  “What are your expectations  (of this workshop)?”  travelled around the room.  While the first few respondents  said some mundane things such as “want to learn about gender” , “want to know each other” and so on, one participant decisively got up. “My husband was  abducted in 2008 and is missing since then… I want to find him.” There ensued an uncomfortable silence in the hall. The poor trainee who was conducting the session was clueless as to how he should respond to this rather unusual expectation of a training programme. So he nervously passed his eye to the next participant who answered “I want to learn how to apply gender issues in real life problems”.  Instantly he blurted out, “Good”. The examiners later quizzed him. Of all the words in the English language, why did he choose the word “good”? As if the previous  expectation was bad?

As the group delved in to the deeper meaning of this particular interaction, the dilemmas faced by the welfare oriented  NGOs  working in the war affected regions became  more  and  more  apparent.  On the one hand they  are forced to work with the rhetoric of “peoples participation” and “empowerment”.  They have to accede to the demands made by the donors in this respect. But on the other they have to work within a system that  is unmerciful and relentless in its grip on centralized  political power.   Even the civil administration in those areas has changed a great deal. The transformation is to the extent that the language hitherto spoken only by the military hierarchy,  such as “ granting  permission”  and  “ban on activities”,  is used now  by the civil administration in their day-to-day interactions with  NGOs.  A single wrong move on their part may mean end of the road for  the NGOs. It is  in working with the most marginalized of the war-affected community that these  vulnerabilities of the NGOs  get to be exposed thoroughly.

Take any commonplace problem posed by typical project beneficiaries in the North and East.  “Since I was relocated I have lost my livelihood”, “I get frequent headaches and cannot engage in any economic activities”,  “I do not know where my son is”,  “ I had submitted an application for housing assistance but I am told some Minister reallocated these houses to some other beneficiaries” and  so it continues.  Any attempt at dealing with any one of  these problems  is to go at logger heads with the State,  challenging policies regarding  national security , endangering   the impunity enjoyed by the  military personnel, and  telling on those politicians favoured by the regime. Imagine if it was a war-affected widow. She  faces all of these multiple problems and more at one go. She actually becomes an embarrassment  to  the  project exposing  the big ‘empowerment’ lie.  The scene at the training session is replayed  every day in the field.  In meetings organized by the NGOs  the widows  attend to pour out their  emotions, only to find the  field workers  listening to them in embarrassed silence.

Government  statistics  indicate that there are approximately 89,000 widows affected by the war in the North and East. The  one strategy  under the given circumstances would be to translate these numbers  in to a veritable  pressure group. Mobilizing and organizing them  so as to effectively access local government services, to carry out policy advocacy regarding  delivery of economic assistance by government and NGOs, and to campaign for the protection of  civil and political rights, would mean giving them a collective voice that calls for radical changes.  But the challenge here is, building their confidence and capacities to conceptualize the linkages between  what they term as their personal problems, to the constitutional and governance crisis enveloping the country. That is in fact, the process of their empowerment.

This project has now been initiated  in selected areas of the North and East.  The activity begins with forming     “Forum of women heads of households “in every Divisional Secretary’s Division.  As searching for livelihood options and accessing necessary resources for their implementation  are  constant issues  for them, facilitating their meeting  with financial institutions and donor agencies become invariably the first set of actions.  Often times it has been proved  that  the members of these forums do manage to obtain some loan facility or assistance for their ventures as soon as they directly communicate to service providers. They are also linked to sections of the Tamil diaspora, which are willing to provide assistance for micro credit or education for their children. Other activity related to livelihoods is  to organize the women in to producer cooperatives.  Cooperatives are effective  ways of pooling resources and labour, and providing mutual support in personal ways. For instance, women who have not been able to meaningfully engage in economic activities due to the burden of childcare could seek help from their fellow producers  in sharing that responsibility. They can access markets and marketing services more effectively.

However, as mentioned before, the  real  challenge before us is to initiate the process of empowerment for  them. This entails reaching out to every single widow, and setting in motion a comprehensive civic education programme for her. For this purpose, the strategy of  connecting  each forum  to other civil society networks in the locality, especially the network of  Women’s  Rural  Development Societies (WRDS), is employed.  These networks   not only provide  help in mobilizing financial resources for the forum members, but also a leadership that is prepared to take the responsibility to conduct adult education sessions for them on a regular basis. Basic principles of human rights and democracy, CEDAW, UNSCR 1325, LLRC recommendations, the role of local governments, provisions of the Sri Lankan constitution  are some of the materials prepared for their use. Sometimes  the  unexpected results after these education sessions. After reading on CEDAW and the UNSCR 1325, one women’s group in the North decided that in  future  they would not ask for permission from the local military commander  when they organize  their regular  meetings and functions.

The third level  would be to link the widows’ forums with regional and international networks that could facilitate their voices to be heard at the level of the UN. Lily Thapa is an activist widow in Nepal who has spearheaded the formation of the South Asian Network  for Widows Empowerment and Development (SANWED).  Similarly, Margaret Owen is another advocate of rights of  widows and who has formed  an organization called Widows for Peace through Democracy (WPD) that is accredited with the  ECOSOC. Currently moves are afoot to ensure that  the issue of widows is specifically mentioned in the general recommendations of the CEDAW committee for the year 2013. The widows from  Sri Lanka intend to include  the  recommendations provided in the LLRC report pertaining to women heads of households as part of the agenda  of these deliberations.

Thus, there  are innumerable  possibilities available to NGOs to turn the situation around. They only need to step away from their ‘project’ mode and  be committed to finding genuine solutions, which will pave the way for  immense creativity in their work.

Actually, widows need not weep anymore.

###

This article is part of an initiative to document and share the progress of the Sri Lanka government’s official reconciliation process. If you are interested in finding out more about the implementation progress of the LLRC recommendations, please visit Vimansa, a website independent of Groundviews, which will be launched in the first quarter of 2013.

Waning Economic Euphoria And The Impending Crisis Of Governance

By Muttukrishna Sarvananthan -January 21, 2013 

Dr. Muttukrishna Sarvananthan

The immediate post-civil war years of 2010 and 2011 in Sri Lanka were trumpeted as record-breaking eight percent or greater annual real growth rate of the Gross Domestic Product (GDP) for two consecutive years including the highest ever economic growth rate of 8.3% recorded in 2011. However, the GDP growth rate in 2012 is unlikely to exceed six percent and the prospect for 2013 is even less. Besides, post-civil war economic growth rates all over the world are always in double-digit and therefore there is nothing to gloat about the high single-digit growth rate in Sri Lanka in 2010 and 2011.

The quarterly GDP growth plummeted to 4.8% during the third-quarter 2012; lowest quarterly growth rate since third-quarter 2009 (4.2%). The agriculture sector, in particular, recorded negative growth of (-) 0.5% during the third-quarter 2012 largely due to severe drought. The agriculture sector is expected to have declined even further during the fourth-quarter 2012 because of severe floods in the major agricultural districts throughout the country in the Eastern, Northern, North Central, and Southern Provinces causing extensive damage to the agricultural crops. The last and first quarters of a calendar year are the main agriculture season (Maha) in the country. More critically, the services sector growth rate of 4.6% during the third-quarter 2012 was the lowest quarterly growth of that sector for more than a decade. The deceleration of the services sector growth rate is critical because the services sector accounted for 58% of Sri Lanka’s GDP in 2011 whereas the agriculture sector’s contribution was only 12%.

The external sector of the economy is even more precarious because the trade deficit in the first eleven months of 2012 was (-) $8.6 billion and is likely to have reached at least (-) $9.5 billion by the end of 2012. While total exports (in terms of US$ value) declined by (-) 6.6%, total imports declined by (-) 4.5% during the first eleven months of 2012. About half of the trade deficit would be compensated by net income from services trade and net transfers (foreign remittances). That would still result in about (-) $4.5 billion deficit in the current account of the balance-of-payments in the external sector in 2012. The total income to the capital account of the balance-of-payments is unlikely to erase the huge deficit in the current account. Therefore, there is a serious likelihood of the overall balance-of-payments in red (deficit) by the end of 2012 for the second consecutive year; probably by a lesser amount than in the end of 2011. The overall balance-of-payments was in deficit by (-) $1.1 billion by the end of 2011.                                    Read More

Dr Nandalal Weerasinghe Confirms Stanley Fischer: Central Banks Should “Never Say Never”

By W.A Wijewardena -January 21, 2013 

Dr W.A. Wijewardena

Fischer’s last lesson to central banks: never say never

The reputed economist and Central Bank’s Deputy Governor Dr Nandalal Weerasinghe, in a public lecture delivered last week at the Central Bank under the theme “The Role of Central Banks in Macroeconomic and Financial System Stability” is reported to have concluded his presentation quoting Stanley Fischer, presently Governor of the Bank of Israel and formerly the Deputy Managing Director of IMF and Professor of Economics at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Weerasinghe has quoted the ten lessons which Fischer had drawn for central banks from the ongoing global economic crisis dubbed by some as the ‘great economic recession’ in a Dinner Lecture titled “Central Bank Lessons from the Global Crisis” delivered at the Bank of Israel in 2011 (available at: http://www.bis.org/review/r110414f.pdf ). While all the ten lessons of this veteran economist and respected central banker are inspiring, the conclusion of his tenth lesson is the most important: In that, Fischer had advised his fellow central bankers that they should never say ‘never’.
Though this slogan appears to be puzzling, Weerasinghe could not have chosen a better phrase to summarise his lecture in just three words.

Central banks should not be guided by fixed dogmas

What Fischer meant by this slogan is that in a crisis situation, one may be forced to adopt measures that are totally unconventional and out of the box. Hence, if one sticks oneself to fixed dogmas and goes by the stand that he will never deviate from those cherished dogmas, he is at a difficulty in finding a fast and appropriate solution to the crisis. Hence, ‘never’ is a dangerous word for a central banker. Instead, a central banker should be open minded, ready to try out new solutions and flexible enough to change his path if it becomes unsuitable. In other words, it is not appropriate for a central banker, and for that matter for any other policy maker, to frame laws for the future when sometimes they may have to violate them. This is because the future is uncertain and fraught with new problems for which old solutions may not work. As a result, crises may require them to adopt policy measures which they would not have even thought of adopting under normal circumstances. This piece of advice from Fischer which Weerasinghe left with his audience, mostly of fellow central bankers, is sensible enough.

Price stability and financial system stability are in conflict with each other  Read More

India must change its Colombo policy, pleads Sri Lankan MP

Chennai, Jan 21, 2013 (IANS):

A prominent Sri Lankan MP wants India to change its Sri Lanka policy, warning that its hands off attitude was encouraging Colombo from meeting the legitimate political aspirations of the island's Tamil minority.

Suresh Premachandran also said in a telephonic interview that the government of President Mahinda Rajapaksa was not sincere in having a dialogue with the elected leaders of the Tamil community.

"One could understand a certain Sri Lanka policy India followed when the LTTE (Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam) was there," the Tamil National Alliance (TNA) member told IANS here.

"Now that the LTTE is no more, India must change its (Sri Lanka) policy," he said. "Otherwise the Sri Lankan government's attitude will not change."

India solidly -- both tacitly and openly -- backed Colombo when the latter waged war on the LTTE, leading to its destruction in May 2009.

Since then, however, the Rajapaksa government has gone back on some of the promises it made to Indian leaders on pursuing a path of reconciliation with the Tamil community.

And Tamil leaders say that India is not putting enough pressure on Sri Lanka to implement what it told Prime Minister Manmohan Singh including on providing genuine autonomy to Tamil areas.

According to Premachandran, Sri Lanka was emboldened vis-a-vis the democratic world because of the support it gets from China.

"They (the regime) don't care about the US and Europe, and they say they can manage India too," said the MP, whose TNA is the main Tamil voice in parliament and which was earlier seen as the LTTE's political arm. "They feel that with China with them, they can manage the UN too."

He accused the Rajapaksa government of militarizing Sri Lanka's Tamil dominated north and allowing the security forces to have a stranglehold over the vast region where the Tigers once held sway.

"The government says they are building infrastructure there but that only amounts to building roads and providing electricity to military camps. The Tamil villages don't get any benefits.

"Those who were with the LTTE are being re-arrested after release. There are military checkpoints everywhere. The government virtually wants to drive away the Tamil youths.  The entire Tamil population is suspect

"When we say all this, people say the TNA is exaggerating. We are not."

According to Premachandran, Sri Lanka's northern province was now like a Palestine - "an occupied territory".

Although the war against the Tamil Tigers ended in 2009, Sri Lanka still battles allegations of human rights abuses, some of it relating to the period when the government defeated the LTTE in a war that left thousands dead and maimed. Colombo routinely denies the charges.

He said the numerous military camps in the northern province were being built with Chinese help. "China also provides heavy military and economic support (to Sri Lanka)."
Premachandran said a TNA delegation would travel Jan 27 to South Africa, which is trying to bring together the Tamil leaders and the government to the negotiating table -- a role once played by India.

But he made it clear that South Africa was unlikely to succeed in its stated mission.

"Personally, I fail to see how South Africa can achieve what it has set out to achieve," he said. "We feel they (Colombo) are doing all this just to make the international community believe they are serious about resolving political issues.

"The harsh reality is the Sri Lankan government is not sincere about talking to the Tamil representatives. They don't want to talk to us.

"They keep telling us to talk to the Parliamentary Select Committee (to resolve political issues). But this committee is dominated by Sinhalese parties, and they will never agree to anything we suggest. Frankly, the government is not serious about a dialogue."

Sri Lanka erasing Tamil language, culture: Karunanidhi

DMK president M. Karunanidhi. File photo

January 20, 2013

DMK president M. Karunanidhi has urged Prime Minister Manmohan Singh and UPA chairperson Sonia Gandhi to take steps to ensure that the Sri Lankan government gave up, what he called, its programme of erasing Tamil language, culture and religion. He sought their help in putting an end to alleged drive by Sri Lankan authorities to rename Tamil villages with Sinhala names.

In identical letters to Dr. Singh and Ms. Gandhi, Mr. Karunanidhi said many more such tactics were being employed by the Sri Lankan government. “Tamils in Sri Lanka are living in an oppressive environment,” he alleged.

Bringing to their notice “disturbing developments” in Sri Lanka vis-à-vis the Tamils, he said: “The Sri Lankan government is now carrying out an intensive and systematic programme of erasing the Tamil language, culture and religion and diluting the concentration of Tamils in areas where they have historically been predominant. This manifests itself in the renaming of Tamil villages, redrawing of village, district and town boundaries, demolishing Hindu temples, non-allocation of funds to resettle and rehabilitate internally displaced Tamil families.”

He said: “The Sri Lankan government is also not allocating funds to schools, hospitals and other infrastructure where the Tamils live predominantly. It is also promoting Sinhala settlements on Tamil land and Sinhalese take over of the economic life of Tamil areas, which impoverishes the Tamils, and the deployment of army camps to intimidate them.” India had a moral obligation to stop this as it involved the eradication of a great culture and ancient religion in our backyard, he said.

Giving details, Mr. Karunanidhi said 89 villages had been renamed with Sinhala terms and 367 Hindu temples had been demolished. There were 148 mini and 13 main army camps in Mullaitivu district alone.

In Amparai district, the Tamil heritage village ‘Potthuvil’ was renamed as ‘Pothuvila’, and ‘Thirukovil’ was renamed as ‘Srikovila’ and ‘Tharavaikulam’ as ‘Tharakkulam’ while ‘Vagarai’ became ‘Vagara’ in Batticalao district and Nilaveli was renamed as Nilvaella, and Alankulam as Gemburuweva in Trincomalee district.

In Jaffna district, Vaddukottaii was renamed as Battakote and Paruththiththurai as Pethuruthoduva, and Nainatheevu as Nagatheeba. With name change, Kilinochchi became Granika, Mullaitivu Mooladoova and Vavuniya, Vannimava, he said.

HAILS RAHUL GANDHI

Mr. Karunanidhi on Sunday congratulated Rahul Gandhi on being appointed as vice-president of Congress and expressed the hope that he would take the party to a ‘new height.’

In his congratulatory message through fax, Mr. Karuananidhi also stated that Mr. Rahul Gandhi’s abiding interest in the youth of our country and his earnest commitment to the advancement of rural areas and farmers were all well-known.

Two Responses: Bulldozers Cannot Destroy SL History And A Speaker’s Duty

By Elmore Perera -January 21, 2013 

Elmore Perera

Money, bulldozers cannot destroy SL History – President

In a news item published in the Island of 20^th December 2012, it was reported that at the opening of the new building complex at the National Archives Department the President had stated that “No one would be able to rewrite the country’s history with the help of money or destroy it by bulldozing places of archaeological value. He was quoted by the Policy Research and Information Unit as having said that no amount of money or might could change a country’s history.

Addressing the LLRC on 10^th November 2010, I stated that on 9^th December 2009 a Victory Memorial was unveiled to the Nation by HE the President at Puthukkudiyirippu. This Victory Memorial is “a tribute to the glorious Forces and to the State Leadership of H.E. the President Mahinda Rajapaksa, Commander in Chief of Armed Forces, who was born for the grace of the Nation, with the guidance and co-ordination of the Secretary Defence Hon. Gotabaya Rajapaksa, and the Operational Command and Military Leadership of the Commander of the Army Lt. Gen. Sarath Fonseka who led the military for the greatest victory through a humanitarian operation where terrorism was entirely eradicated from our motherland and restoring its territorial integrity and the “perpetual peace”.

However the Victory Monument of Puthukkudiyirippu which has since replaced that Memorial, reads as follows: “The Victory Monument was unveiled to the Nation by His Excellency Mahinda Rajapaksa, the President of the Democratic Socialist Republic of Sri Lanka, and Commander-in-Chief of the Armed Forces with the participation of Honourable Lalith Weerathunga, the Secretary to the President and Honourable Gotabaya Rajapaksa RWP, RSP psc,   the Secretary  to the Ministry of Defence, Public Security, and Law and Order on the invitation of Lieutenant General J. Jayasuriya USP ndu psc the Commander of the Sri Lanka Army, on 9^th December 2009.”

The first refers to the War Memorial unveiled to the Nation on 9^th December 2009 by H.E., the President whereas the second refers to the Victory Monument unveiled to the Nation also on 9^th December 2009 by H.E. the President.

At first sight, it appears that Money and Bulldozers seem to have destroyed and/or significantly altered Sri Lanka History. The President certainly cannot take kindly to this brazen attempt to destroy and/or alter Sri Lanka History. The onus is on him to set the record straight and discipline those who have wilfully undermined his credibility.

Entertainment of a Motion – A Speaker’s Duty

In an article published in the Daily Mirror of 19^th January 2013, Senior Attorney-at-Law Sanath Jayatilaka had correctly stated that in terms of Standing Order 78A (i) (reproduced by him, in full) “the Speaker carries a huge responsibility and should not deal with the entertainment as we do in normal life when dealing with a social occasion”. Having referred to the definition of the word “entertain” in Black’s Law Dictionary he correctly states that “the Hon. Speaker ought to have examined the charges” and in doing so “he would have inquired how absolutely confidential information provided by the Chief Justice in her declaration of Assets, (access to which could have been only by a due process through the President, the Bribery Commission and, may be, by an order of Court) reached the signatories”. Jayatilaka goes on to state that “if” the Speaker had done so he would have referred the signatories to what he cannot entertain and even “gone the second mile” and “referred them to their respective legal remedy as provided for by law in Sansoni J’s judgment on the Paddy Lands Act”. Then on “investigation” by the correct authority   (perhaps the Bribery Commission which displayed remarkable alacrity and prowess in charging the spouse of the Chief Justice) the Chief Justice would have been charged and if the charges are proved, they would have a “proved misconduct” in their hands, to enable the Speaker to “entertain” their application,
place it on the Order Paper of Parliament, appoint a Select Committee and proceed further under Standing Order 78A.

Having stated these indisputable facts, Jayatilaka goes on to state “Hence Chamal Rajapaksa” failed in his statutory duty and an order in the nature of a writ would be available to any party interested.

Both Jayatilaka and I, and undoubtedly many, many others, are very well aware that Chamal Rajapaksa retired after exemplary service as a Police Officer, before venturing into politics. To succeed in politics there was no requirement that he should necessarily further his legal knowledge/expertise. As such it seems to me that Jayatilaka was being a little bit unfair in expecting Chamal Rajapaksa as Speaker to offer legal advice to the signatories of the Impeachment Motion, since their knowledge of matters “legal” are largely restricted to their appearances in Court in response to “summons” or “notices” served on them, or on those near and dear to them.

However, Jayatilaka has, quite correctly stated “Hence Chamal Rajapaksa has failed in his statutory duty and an order in the nature of a writ would be available to any party interested”. The justification for this irrefutable conclusion of Jayatilaka lies in the proviso to Article 107 (2) of the Constitution, which states clearly that “no resolution for the presentation of such an address shall be entertained by the Speaker or placed on the Order Paper of Parliament, unless notice of such resolution is signed by not less than one-third of the total number of Members of Parliament and sets out full particulars of the alleged misbehaviour or incapacity”.

Whereas the first pre-condition has clearly been satisfied the Speaker has failed to reject the motion on the basis that the second pre-condition re full particulars of the alleged misbehaviour (which clearly excludes anything other than “proved misconduct”) or incapacity, had not been satisfied.

It is significant that even on 4^th January 2013, the Deputy Speaker who is a lawyer stated to the media that the Select Committee was only mandated to “investigate and report” only, and specifically that it was not mandated to make a “finding of guilt”. Had the Speaker consulted his Deputy before “entertaining” the resolution he may not have failed in his statutory duty and certainly would have averted the present state of  anarchy, where the rule of law has been replaced by the rule of men who consider themselves infallible and above the law.

An open apology to the nation will not be out of place.

*Elmore Perera, Attorney-at-Law, Founder CIMOGG, Past President OPA  

US and India to pass another resolution against SL [ Monday, 21 January 2013, 05:24.07 AM GMT +05:30 ] The United States of America and India are exploring to pass another resolution against SriLanka at the upcoming United Nation Human Rights Council session in Geneva in March, Ceylon Today reports. The resolution may be called on the grounds that Sri Lanka has made little progress in implementing the recommendations made in the report of the Lessons Learnt and Reconciliation Commission (LLRC), particularly with regard to setting up investigations into at least the seven or eight specific incidents that they have identified, including the Channel Four video, a reliable source confirmed. It was reported that Secretary to the President, Lalith Weeratunga, has supposedly told a diplomatic gathering that only 35% of the LLRC recommendations have been implemented by the government so far. According to Dr. Paikiasothy Saravanamuttu, Executive Director, Centre for Policy Alternatives (CPA), some of the major areas of the LLRC recommendations are basically ‘untouched’ or considered working on, by the government. “There are lots of new matters getting added for talks and perhaps the impeachment and victimization of ousted Chief Justice, Dr. Shirani Bandaranayake, and the arrest of the Jaffna University students are some questionable issues that may be taken up,” he said. Among the barely touched issues, according Dr. Saravanamuttu, are several major components of the LLRC recommendations – a political settlement has ‘not been touched,’ demilitarization of Northern Sri Lanka and land grabbing from the Tamils, have not been taken up for discussion.

China card becomes ‘license’ for genocidal order

[TamilNet, Sunday, 20 January 2013, 10:27 GMT]
With the seemingly blackmailing speech of Gotabhaya Rajapaksa, reported in Colombo media on Friday that if the USA withdraws its military training programmes to Sri Lanka, China would replace them, it becomes very explicit that the China card is now openly used for justifying a genocidal State order in the world, Tamil political analysts in the island said. Gotabhaya’s stand reported in Colombo media as “We don’t need you, we got China, Gotabhaya tells US,” is not taken seriously by Tamil political analysts, since Gotabhaya would have thrown away his US pass port if he was that ‘Sri Lankan’ and the US policy analysts and groups would not have been engaged in ‘reaching out’ Sri Lanka and engineering the integrity of the genocidal State, if Gota’s speech really means anything, the analysts said. 

Both the USA and India follow only a policy of ‘reaching out’ to Sri Lanka, whatever genocidal it is, and sections of the US and Indian analysts go to the extent of blaming the sentiments of the people of Tamil Nadu for being an impediment in the process, Tamil political analysts said.

If a card is repeatedly misused by a State, that too to the extent of committing and sustaining genocide and defying all norms of civilised humanity, then citing the card and advocating for ‘reaching out’ the State is only a criminal approach to international relations that will have a domino effect. The suspicion increasingly falls on those who cite the card than the one in whose name the card is used, the analysts said.

Geopolitical preoccupations may come and go. But credibility lost will not come back and will take its toll on the blunderers. If geopolitics is the problem, change the geopolitics, bring in new equations, but abetting genocide is not the answer, the Tamil political analysts responded to the current media deliberations in the West and in South Asia that blow geopolitical sirens to push the question of the right to liberation of genocide-facing Eezham Tamils to the margin.

Speaking at a ceremony of Sri Lanka’s National Chamber of Commerce held at Hotel Hilton in Colombo, the SL Defence Secretary and presidential sibling, Gotabhaya Rajapaksa was cited saying, “The biggest threat the US can pose to Sri Lanka’s military is to take away their defence scholarships”

“We can send our soldiers to China for training,” Gotabhaya added.

This is the same thing Colombo told India too, when Tamil Nadu protested over India training Sri Lanka’s military, and how New Delhi uses that to justify its continued complicity in Colombo’s genocide of Eezham Tamils is well known.

The Maldivian media was equally sceptical about the West practically acting against the Rajapaksa regime.

“His sacking of Sri Lanka's chief justice may have prompted new international condemnation, but analysts say President Mahinda Rajapakse is not merely impervious to foreign criticism -- he thrives off it,” The Maldivian media Haveeru said on Thursday.

“Given that Western criticism of the army's actions at the end of the civil war had little impact on the government, it is unlikely to worry about the response to the impeachment," Haveeru cited Chatham House think tank’s Gareth Price telling AFP.

According to news reports, Gotabhaya speaking at Hilton has also claimed that Sri Lanka had not received any weapons assistance from the US during the war.

Whether he was subtly shielding the USA from its architecture cum gang-up contribution to the genocidal war, Tamil political observers in the island ask.

Meanwhile, elements close to Gotabhaya, who cast sane images in New Delhi and Washington, are actively engaged in campaigning in the US, defending the Rajapaksa regime on the SL Chief Justice impeachment case, informed circles said.

China’s continued silence over a paradigmatic misuse of its card in the genocidal context of the island is not going to help its image in the region in the long run, if it really cares for long-term achievements in the region, commented Tamil political analysts in the island.

Reconciliation: Looking Forward xii – Constitutional Anomalies

By Rajiva Wijesinha -January 21, 2013 

Prof Rajiva Wijesinha

In the whole sorry impeachment saga, the UNP seems to have done the impossible and managed to keep everyone happy. Though some other opposition parties are making valiant attempts to criticize them, since the criticisms are not based on clear arguments, similar generalities on the part of UNP officials will allow them to emerge unscathed.

This is a pity, because proper analysis of their role will also suggest what they might do to make things better in the future. Firstly, they should acknowledge the absurdity of the Standing Order that they put in place hurriedly in 1984, mainly it seems to keep Neville Samarakoon quiet. While they have granted that this is hopelessly inadequate and requires further elaboration, the efforts of some to condemn the Standing Order were stymied, on the grounds that that would amount to criticism of their sacred cow, namely J R Jayewardene’s Constitution and its appendages.

Since the UNP leader affirmed this principle, and also refrained from speaking on the Impeachment Resolution, he continues to convince decision makers in government that he is the best possible Opposition Leader for the Government. This is myopic, because they think only in terms of popularity within Sri Lanka. Whilst certainly Ranil Wickremesinghe would fare disastrously in any electoral competition with the President, the same applies with regard to any other possible leader of the Opposition.

The UNP strategy rather is based on influencing the international community, and in this regard Wickremesinghe is streets ahead of anyone else in the field. And whether we like it or not, in this globalized world, the international community can affect opinion in this country and elsewhere even without resorting to the underhand measures the former American Political Affairs Officer engaged in.

At the very least, we need investment, and the not very subtle comments of the Americans following the impeachment suggest areas in which pressures might be applied. We should not then forget history when a UNP leader, whom everyone had thought for years could never be elected, swept the polls largely because of the economic deprivation the country was facing in 1977.

It was that which allowed him to introduce the 1978 Constitution. Characteristically, the current UNP  refusal to admit how awful that Constitution is goes hand in hand with a determination to limit now the powers of the Presidency which they allowed Jayewardene to exercise without restraints. This anomaly with regard to the17^th Amendment they now see as sacrosanct has never been pinpointed.

One argument used by critics of the government who resent the continued support given to the government by those within it who opposed the impeachment is that their vote in favour of the 18^th amendment shows they are not really interested in democratic principles or practice. This is absurd because, as I have pointed out for many years, the 17^th amendment was an ad hoc measure which confused two Constitutional dispensations.

In both there are mechanisms to reduce the absolute power of the Head of Government to appoint whom they want to positions of importance, but they are very different, given the differing status of such Heads of Government. Where the Head of Government is not the Head of State, as is the case under the Westminster system, the Prime Minister forwards a recommendation to the President or Monarch, who duly appoints. In practice the Head of State will not turn down any recommendation, but the very fact that someone else is responsible for the final appointment means that the Prime Minister will exercise care in making recommendations.

Where the Head of Government is also the Head of State, the situation is very different, because the ultimate responsibility is his. That is why checks are exercised through an advise and / or consent mechanism. I will flesh out this idea further in a later article, but for the moment it should be noted that, under the 1978 Constitution, for over 20 years, there was no such check on the absolute power of the President to appoint – and no one in politics now complained about that, except I think the Liberal Party.

Justice put to the sword by Govt.’s show of force

Sunday, January 20, 2013

The art of coarse law enforcement at Dr Bandaranayake’s ‘no show’ at Hulftsdorp when lawyers were given short shrift while Govt. supporters made merry.�

Namini Wijedasa and Wasantha Ramanayake �report

The corridors of the Superior Courts building were oddly uncongested on Tuesday, the first day of work for the New Year.

Barbarians at the barricades: This was the pitiful scene that greeted the legal fraternity and media personnel in the vicinity of the Supreme Court in Hulftsdorp, the pinnacle of justice. Pix by Indika Handuwala

There should have been throngs of jovial lawyers, slapping one another on their backs, and asking how the holidays had been. But attendance was markedly low. Attorneys drifted through the passageways looking apprehensive. Some assembled in small clusters, discussed current affairs in muted tones.

A lone security guard stood outside Court 502 (usually the domain of the Chief Justice) watching a drama unfold in the street below. Hundreds of policemen, armed guards and plainclothes agents had been deployed around Hulftsdorp. Every gate to the Superior Courts complex was barricaded. There were two water cannon, one of them parked near the headquarters of the Sri Lanka Bar Association.

Court security checked all vehicles that sought entry into the premises, regardless of whether they belonged to lawyers or judges. This was not the norm. If the vehicles had tinted windows, they opened the doors and peered inside. They even looked into the boot. “Do they expect to find her crouching on the floor?” a journalist asked, referring to Dr Shirani Bandaranayake who maintains she is still the Chief Justice.

For it was to prevent Dr Bandaranayake from accessing the Courts complex that the government had expended so much energy and resources. The previous week, Parliament had voted to unseat her and President Mahinda Rajapaksa sacked her barely two days later.

Dr Bandaranayake did not (and still does not) accept her impeachment. It was widely expected, therefore, that she would report for duty at the Supreme Court on Tuesday. Several cases were listed to be taken up in Court 502. The other judges on the bench were to be Justices P.A. Ratnayake and S.I. Imam.

From the early hours of the morning, it was evident that the government had no intention of letting her through. In addition to ordinary policemen and STF personnel, the area was swarming with high-ranking officials. Among them was Brigadier Shantha Dissanayake, General Officer Commanding of the 14 Division including Colombo.

Asked why he was there, Brig. Dissanayake replied, “I’m responsible for Colombo. I want to see what’s happening from the ground.” Extra police contingents hung around, awaiting instructions. Some napped in three-wheelers parked near the Sanchi Arachchi Watta flats.

Initially, the police were “all business”. They made lines to block the entrances, at times holding hands in a chain. The STF stood to attention. But as the morning progressed, it seemed unlikely that Dr Bandaranayake would come. Reports said she was in the midst of vacating her official residence in Colombo 7.

Tiredness—and boredom—set in. The sun beat down. The media, who were present in large numbers, grew restless. A senior police official quietly passed a small digital camera to a press photographer.

“Putha,” he said, “take a nice photo of me. Make sure you capture me with the Supreme Court in the background.” He walked back towards the barricades and tried to look busy.

At 10 am, around 150 people were led in a march to Hulftsdorp by Sri Lanka Freedom Party (SLFP) local government politician Mahinda Kahandagama. They shouted in support of President Rajapaksa and his new Chief Justice nominee, Mohan Pieris. One of them used a megaphone. They also applauded the Bar Association and its president, Wijeyadasa Rajapakshe.

Whither justice? STF personnel walk in through the gate meant only for judges

Sunil Watagala a lawyer from the Lawyers’ Collective, engaged in heated argument with police when they were not allowed to speak to the media

A pro-government raucous crowd stands ready, while a senior policeman looks on

Amidst the melee, the new Chief Justice Mohan Peiris, drove in with his convoy

Mr. Kahandagama told journalists it was a historic day. “The country has ushered in a new era,” he waxed. “The government has chased away the wrongdoers.” His followers surged onto the road, obstructing an entire lane of traffic. Instead of ordering them off the road, the police carefully directed vehicles around them.

The media were barred from entering the Superior Courts complex through the main entrance. This, too, was not the norm. Sunil Watagala and Srinath Perera—two lawyers from the Lawyers Collective, a union that had opposed the impeachment—invited journalists into the premises for a briefing. When they were obstructed, a heated argument ensued between the lawyers and police.

Mr. Watagala and Mr. Perera then attempted to address the media at the gate. The police prevented this saying it would impede vehicular movement. The lawyers were nowhere near the main road. Meanwhile, Kahandagama’s men again obstructed traffic in their efforts to intimidate and interrupt the lawyers.

A large number of attorneys soon exited the Superior Courts complex to offer backing to the besieged Mr. Watagala and Mr. Perera. Among them was Upul Jayasuriya, who is contesting for Bar Association presidency. Standing in the glaring sunshine, they lit candles and blew them out to signify that the “light of justice” had been snuffed out.

Inside the Superior Courts building, sittings had commenced. Cases were taken up in both the Supreme and Appeal Courts. There was no boycott. The passageway outside Court 502 was empty but for a handful of lawyers. On the bench were Justices Ratnayake and Imam. They postponed all of their cases and vacated the room because the Bench was not properly constituted (“Dr Shirani Bandaranayake CJ” had been listed to preside that day). It was now clear that Dr Bandaranayake would not come.

“The State has all the weapons,” reflected a lawyer who tarried outside 502 after the others had left. “There is a limit to how much you can fight the State. I think that limit was reached.” He requested anonymity.

“We don’t like what happened,” said an old attorney, who also wanted to remain anonymous. “But we can’t subject ourselves to ‘gal, mul prahara’.” The legal community was glad Dr Bandaranayake had avoided being humiliated by the authorities that day, said his younger colleague.

Asked why they had not organised a demonstration, he said, “We were not sure what was happening. The Bar Association had a meeting, but there was no decision to do something today.”

“In any case,” he scoffed, “the government is well conversant in street protests. We are lawyers and intellectuals. There are judges here. We have ethics and rules. We cannot stoop to the level of this government. We can’t act like Mervyn Silva.”

“But I can promise you one thing,” he continued. “All of us, including the provincial bar, are against what happened. We have all been affected by it.”

News then broke that Mr. Pieris had been sworn in as Chief Justice before President Mahinda Rajapaksa. The police stopped wilting. They stood to attention again. Security officers gathered round. The STF smartened up. The media gave up waiting for Dr Bandaranayake, and quickly gathered at the Justice Ministry gate.

Even as cameramen focused their lenses intently on the entrance, Mr. Pieris sped into the premises without so much as a wave. His motorcade disappeared into the car park, leaving journalists to remark how a fountain that had been broken for many months was now sprinkling water gaily into the air.

By Wednesday, all courts were functioning as usual. The State had managed to stamp out months of turmoil, one way or the other.