CALL FOR TRUTH ABOUT CARTOONIST’S DISAPPEARANCE THREE YEARS AGO

See the interview with former editor of the Sunday Leader, Frederica Jansz, now in exile, at the end of the press release- THURSDAY 24 JANUARY 2013.

On the the third anniversary of the disappearance of Prageeth Ekneligoda, a freelance cartoonist and political analyst who worked for the Lanka-e-News website, Reporters Without Borders (RWB) and Journalists for Democracy in Sri Lanka (JDS) reiterate their call for justice and condemn the failure of the authorities to make any progress with the investigation.

“Ekneligoda has been missing for three years and the investigation by the Sri Lankan police and judicial authorities has ground to a complete halt,” RWB and JDS said.

“The government’s lack of action and supreme court chief justice Shirani Bandaranayake’s recent replacement by a relative of President Mahinda Rajapakse is further proof that the Rajapaksa family is consolidating its grip on the judiciary and, in so doing, is suppressing the truth about many cases including those involving media freedom.

“By appointing Mohan Peiris, who told the United Nations outrageous lies, as supreme court chief justice, Sri Lanka’s president is openly signalling his desire to quickly close the investigations into Ekneligoda’s death and fellow journalist Lasantha Wickrematunga’s murder.”

Ekneligoda disappeared as he was leaving the offices of the Lanka-e-News website in Colombo on 24 January. Government officials made a series of contradictory statements about his disappearance while the police made few efforts to find him alive.

A former attorney-general, Mohan Peiris told the United Nations Committee Against Torture in Geneva on 9 November 2011 that Ekneligoda was alive and in hiding somewhere abroad but he retracted when questioned by a Colombo court last year.

Ekneligoda was a well-known cartoonist whose work advocated respect for democracy and minority rights. His disappearance came at a time of considerable political tension just three days before President Rajapakse’s reelection on 27 January 2010.

His wife, Sandya Ekneligoda, reported his disappearance to several police stations and the National Commission on Human Rights. She went on to seek international support, turning to UN secretary-general Ban Ki-moon and the UN representative in Colombo. In March 2012, she went to Geneva to testify to the UN Human Rights Council.

Journalists, especially those who try to shed light on the human rights violations that took place during the final months of the Tamil rebellion, have been subject to an unprecedented campaign of threats and intimidation since 2009.

The campaign stepped up in March 2012 in the run-up to a UN Human Rights Council session that examined the situation in Sri Lanka. The council adopted a resolution calling on Sri Lanka to prosecute those suspected of human rights violations during the war.

The anniversary of Ekneligoda’s disappearance comes just two weeks after the fourth anniversary of the death of Lasantha Wickrematunga, the editor of the opposition Sunday Leadernewspaper, who was gunned down in Colombo on 8 January 2009. His murder remains unpunished.

A country where journalists are permanently exposed to violence and impunity although its civil war officially ended in 2009, Sri Lanka is ranked 163rd out of 179 countries in the 2011-2012 press freedom index and is classified as country “under surveillance” in the Reporters Without Borders Internet survey.

Reporters Without Borders has interviewed Sri Lankan journalist Frederica Jansz, a formerSunday Leader editor who recently left the country after receiving repeated death threats:

The Impeachment As A Primer On The Rajapaksa Way

By Tisaranee Gunasekara -January 24, 2013 |

“Dreadful symptoms of the coming dissolution….”Thomas Mann (Buddenbrooks)

In a classified cable written on 24^th February 2010 (and revealed subsequently by Wikileaks), theUS Ambassador identified Supreme Court Justice Shirani Bandaranayake as a supposed ‘Rajapaksa-loyalist’.

The vicious and illegal impeachment of the same Shirani Bandaranayake, just two and half years later, demonstrates that the Rajapaksas do not tolerate loyalists; they demand acolytes. One is either a Rajapaksa-serf, with no mind or will of one’s own; or a Rajapaksa-enemy, who will be vilified and hounded out.

In the Rajapaksa universe, the middle-ground between subjugation and opposition does not exist. Those who think that they are allies and loyalists will find themselves standing on quicksand, sooner or later. At that point the only choice is between submission and resistance.

That was the story of Chief Justice Shirani Bandaranayake.

It all began with the Sacred Areas Act. That most invidious and iniquitous piece of legislation, and not the Divineguma Bill, was the casus belli of the impeachment.

The Sacred Areas Act – Town and Country Planning (Amendment) Bill is its full title – is a Rajapaksa classic. The Act consisted of 4 pages and 8 clauses. Its purpose was to give the Rajapaksas absolute control over every inch of private land. It empowered the Minister of Buddha Sasana and Religious Affairs to acquire any land or building by the simple expedient of affixing a label and issuing a gazette notification.

Compared to the Sacred Areas Act, the Divineguma Bill is a model of rectitude and accountability.

Clause 4 of the Act empowered the Minister to takeover ‘any area of land’ in ‘any municipal area, an urban development area or any trunk road development area’ defined as:

a)      a ‘Protection area’ for the protection of natural amenities;

b)      a ‘Conservation area’ for the conservation of the natural environment and the protection of places of natural beauty within the environment or

c)      an ‘Architectural’ or ‘Historic Area’ for the conservation of architectural or historical value.

Clause 5 empowered the Minister to define any land as a ‘Sacred Area’ and take it over.

The Act would have made land-grabbing easy, fast and perfectly legal. The Rajapaksas, their kith and kin could have decided that a farm is in a ‘conservation area’, a factory in a ‘protection area’ or a house has an ‘architectural value’, and acquired any of them, legally. No Lankan would have been safe from the marauding powers of this most draconian law, from small-holding farmers and middle class home-owner to large-scale businessmen. It was Step II of the process Rajapaksa-takeover economic assets begun by the Expropriations Act of 2011.

Since they had the parliamentary numbers, the Rajapaksas would have regarded the Act as a fait accompli.

In November 2011, in response to a petition by the CPA, a Supreme Court bench headed by CJ Shirani Bandaranayake ruled against the Sacred Areas Act. The right to private property is not a fundamental right enshrined in the constitution. Therefore the Sacred Areas Act could have been deemed constitutional had it not been for the 13^th Amendment. Under the 13^th Amendment, land is a devolved subject. The 13^thAmendment clearly stipulates that legislation on devolved subjects needs the concurrence of all provincial councils. The CJ could not have approved the Sacred Areas Act without committing a barefaced violation of the Constitution.

The Act was already on the parliamentary order paper when the Supreme Court ruled that it needs the approval of all provincial councils. Speaker Chamal Rajapaksa circulated the Act amongst provincial councils for their approval. The councils were told to give their consent by February 15^th 2012. Since the UPFA controlled all existing PCs, no snags were expected.

But the Eastern PC refused to approve the Act; both the TMVP and the SLMC opposed it. And even more surprisingly, the North Central PC wanted more time to discuss the Act.

Faced with this unexpected resistance, the government withdrew the Act in April 2012.

Three people were instrumental in impeding the Sacred Areas Act – CJ Bandaranayake, the Chief Minister of the NCP Berty Premalal Dissanayake and the Chief Minister of the EP Sivanesathurai Chandrakanthan.

14 months later all three are out of jobs.

In September 2012, the government forced the untimely dissolution of three provincial councils. The Chief Minister of the Sabaragamuwa PC was reappointed but not the chief ministers of the rebellious NCPC and the EP. The TMVP and the SLMC were humiliated publicly.

The new NCPC and EPC acceded to the Divineguma Bill without a murmur.

Weeks after the regime was forced to withdraw the Sacred Areas Act, the NSB scandal erupted.

Shirani Bandaranayake became the CJ in May 2011. Pradeep Kariyawasam was appointed Chairman of Sri Lanka Insurance in June 2009 and Chairman of the NSB in May 2010. At the time his wife was a mere Supreme Court justice and thus totally dependent on Rajapaksa-goodwill. President Rajapaksa was being his mendacious-self when he told the wilfully-gullible Minister Witarana that he appointed Mr. Kariyawasam to the NSB because he feared to antagonise Dr. Bandaranayake.

Whether the Rajapaksas used a really existing case against Mr. Kariyawasam (as they did with Berty Premalal Dissanayake – the case of Lolugaswewa road) or whether they initiated/manufactured a case remains to be discovered. Either way, their intent was to punish the CJ’s husband for her refusal to violate the constitution.

And to send her a signal about the costs of dissent.

The CJ refused to become a serf and was hounded out of office.

Legalising Persecution and Repression

The presence of a totally servile Chief In-justice constitutes an ‘Open Sesame’ for the Rajapaksa-project of killing democracy via legal means. The law allowing the detention of suspects for 48 hours is already through; it will not be used against white-vanners. A new law imposing a two-year prison term and a million rupee-fine on anyone maintaining contacts with a banned terrorist organisation is to be introduced next month.

The bizarre development in the Kolonnawa quadruple murder case is an omen of how the law will work, post-impeachment. The driver of Bharatha Lakshman Premachandra, in his eye-witness evidence claimed that after Mr. Premachandra fell, “Duminda Silva fired at Mr. Premachandra and shouted out ‘wedithiyapan – wedithiyapan’ (shoot – shoot). About 10 others with him opened fire” (The Sunday Times – 23.10.2011). This week, this key witness against Duminda Silva recanted and said that he made his original statement under duress. The way is thus opened for the AG’s Department to exonerate that prominent Rajapaksa-kith, Duminda Silva. With the AG who withdrew child rape charges against Mr. Silva now heading the judiciary, the transformation of Duminda Silva from suspect to victim should happen fast.

The regime is ordering 3,300 tear-gas canisters, 2,500 riot helmets and other riot-control equipment at the cost of Rs.17.37 million. Given the Rajapaksa-plan to extract as much money from the citizenry via taxes – a garbage tax is in the offing – the extra equipment will be needed to supplement the persecutory-work of the new judiciary.

Serfs will be protected and promoted. Those who refuse will be persecuted and destroyed.

The middle-ground is a myth.

Welcome to Rajapaksa Sri Lanka.

Five arrested for gang rape

THURSDAY, 24 JANUARY 2013

Five men have been arrested for the alleged gang rape of a 45 year old woman, in Wijerama Nugegoda late last night, the Police said,
 
The Police had received a tip off on its emergency hotline 119 after which the Mirihana Police had pursued the suspects.

Ceremonial sitting under a cloud

• Only State media permitted to cover ceremony
• CJ Mohan Peiris welcomed by Attorney General and Razik Zarook
• Defence Secretary and Central Bank Governor attend ceremony at SC

• Anti-impeachment lawyers say eminent members of legal fraternity boycotted event
• BASL to consider action against Zarook for address without consent

By Dharisha Bastians-Published : 1:38 am  January 24, 2013  
The Ceremonial Sitting to welcome new Chief Justice Mohan Peiris was held at the Supreme Court yesterday, despite a boycott by the Bar Association and a blackout of the private.
Several judges, officials from the Attorney General’s Department and lawyers attended the ceremony at the Superior Court Complex at Hulftsdorp last morning.

Two formal addresses are traditionally made at the Ceremonial Sitting to welcome a new Chief Justice, one by the President of the Bar Association as the head of the unofficial bar and one by the Attorney General, as the head of the official Bar.
However, BASL President Wijeyadasa Rajapakse did not attend the Ceremonial Sitting, in adherence to the BASL resolution passed in December that the Bar would boycott the ceremony if Chief Justice Shirani Bandaranayake was unlawfully removed from office.
The address on behalf of the unofficial Bar was delivered by Chairman of Bank of Ceylon, President’s Counsel Razik Zarook. Attorney General Palitha Fernando delivered the address on behalf of the official Bar.
Among those present at the ceremony were Secretary to the President Lalith Weeratunga, Defence Secretary Gotabaya Rajapaksa, and Central Bank Governor Ajith Nivard Cabraal.
Meanwhile, anti-impeachment activists in the legal community charged that the Ceremonial Sitting was held in breach of traditions followed for over 200 years and was boycotted by the BASL and all leading President’s Counsel in the country.
“For the first time in the history the Ceremonial Sitting to welcome new Chief Justice was held under heavy Police protection as has never been seen before,” a report from legal activists said.
“Notably absent at the ceremony were President’s Counsel Wijeyadasa Rajapakse, K. Kanag-Isvaran, Romesh de Silva, Ikram Mohamed, Srinath Perera, Dr. Jayampathy Wickremaratne, Geoffry Alagaratnam, Jayantha Gunasekera, Anil Silva, Ananda Wijesekera, Maureen Seneviratne, Rohan Sahabandu, Uditha Egalahewa, Prasanna Jayewardene, Maithree Wickremasinghe, Harsha Amarasekera, Nalin Ladduwahetty and Senior Lawyers S.L. Gunasekera and I.S. de Silva,” the legal activists said.
They said that a ceremonial sitting of the Supreme Court is traditionally organised after the Bar Association of Sri Lanka makes an official request for a ceremonial welcome of Judge who is appointed to the Supreme Court. “Without such a request there cannot be an official ceremonial sitting,” the lawyers said.
They said pro-Government lawyers who are holding key posts in State corporations and departments had participated in yesterday’s ceremony. “There was not a single President’s Counsel with a standing who was willing to break the tradition and go against the resolution passed by Bar Association of Sri Lanka,” the lawyers said.

Impeachment helps Deputy Speaker Chandima Weerakkody

Thursday, 24 January 2013 

A plan is underway to get Speaker Chamal Rajapaksa appointed as the Prime Minister at the next Cabinet reshuffle. Sources say that Deputy Speaker Chandima Weerakkody is to be appointed as the Speaker when the position falls vacant.

The Constitutional Council had met on the 22nd. Unconfirmed reports state that the proposal to appoint the Deputy Speaker as the next Speaker had been presented to the Council for approval.

It is no secret that the impeachment motion had a sever impact on the country’s judiciary and law and order. However, the issue benefited some. They are the people who supported the Rajapaksas without any shame. One such person was Deputy Speaker Chandima Weerakkody and he is about to reap the benefits of his shameless acts. The Rajapaksa regime’s policy of helping the peoples who stand by them without any shame would help Weerakkody as well.

Interestingly, the Deputy Speaker had also assumed the position of an economic analyst during the process. It was evident in the comments published in the website operated under Minister Wimal Weerawansa’s supervision. Weerawansa was also one of the judges in the impeachment process.

“The US Secretary of State has said that the impeachment against the Chief Justice would have a negative impact on US investments. I don’t know what the secretary is saying.

“The US is in dire straits after following her ideologies. The country’s economy has got strong after removing the Chief Justice. The programme to take the country forward had become strong.

“The US growth rate is around one to two percent. The US is expecting a two percent growth rate in 2013 as well. However, our economic growth is 6.8 percent. We are looking at achieving the same economic rate in 2013. World Bank reports have also indicated it. The secretary that has a fallen economy due to bad polices is trying to tell us that investments to our country are going to stop.

“The President has been able to prevent various forces from pushing the country into an abyss.”

A senior SLFP member who is to retire shortly has said, “This fellow seems to be following the condom theory and some day when Cabraal leaves, he will say that the country’s law and order situation has got strong since he left. Our bosses find these people more important than us.”

Deputy Speaker: “I Know The Law”

By Goda Perakadoru -January 3, 2013 

Chandima Weerakkody, Deputy Speaker, has been projecting himself as a constitutional expert in the last few weeks, no doubt to be in the good books of the Mahinda Rajapakse regime. Weerakkody was earlier a staunch supporter of President Chandrika Bandaranaike Kumaratunga. He was the person who was behind initiating contempt proceedings against S.B. Dissanayake at the instance of President Kumaratunga. The offending speech by Dissanayake was made at a Vap Magul Ceremony held at Habaraduwa. Weerakkody was the Sri Lanka Freedom Party organizer of Habaraduwa and was instrumental in getting three of his supporters to complain to the Supreme Court against Dissanayake. After Rajapakse became President, Weerakkody has taken great pains to erase his pro-Chandrika image.

Weerakkody was one of the first to comment on the decision of the Supreme Court in regard to impeachment proceedings against Chief Justice Shirani Bandaranayake. He has stated that Article 107 (3) of the Constitution permits Parliament to provide either by law or Standing Orders for all matters relating to the impeachment of a superior court judge.

Mahinda, Chandima and Susil 

Article 107 (3) is as follows: “Parliament shall by law or by Standing Orders provide for all matters relating to the presentation of such an address, including the procedure for the passing of a such resolution, the investigation and proof of the alleged misbehaviour or incapacity and the right of such Judge to appear and to be heard in person or by representative.”

According to Weerakkody, Parliament is free to provide for all matters relating to the impeachment either by law or Standing Orders and it has opted to use Standing Orders. This is the very question that arose before the Supreme Court. The Court has held that while matters relating to the presentation of an impeachment motion and the passing of a resolution for impeachment can be stipulated by Standing Orders, the conferring of legal powers on a body to make a finding or a decision affecting the rights of a person can only be done by a law of Parliament. It has emphasized that Standing Orders are not ‘law.’

The Court stated as follows: “A Parliamentary Select committee appointed in terms of Standing Order 78A derives its power and authority solely from the said Standing order which is not a law. Therefore a Select Committee appointed under and in terms of Standing Order 78A has no legal power or authority to make a finding adversely affecting the legal rights of a Judge against whom the allegations made in the resolution moved under proviso to Article 107 (2), is the subject matter of the investigation. The power to make a valid finding after investigation contemplated in Article 107 (3) can be conferred on a court, tribunal or a body, only by law and by law alone.” (Underlining by the Court).

The Court further stated: “Matters relating to the presentation of an address and the procedure for the passing of such resolution are matters which can be stipulated by Standing orders but there is nothing to prevent Parliament from providing for such matters by law as well.”

Weerakkody, the new constitutional expert, should have first read the decision of the Supreme Court before commenting on it. In fact, he told the media that he has not seen the judgment.

Midweek Politics: Apathy In The Aftermath

By Dharisha Bastians -January 24, 2013 

Dharisha Bastians

A return to the status quo seems inevitable in the impeachment aftermath. A new administration at Hulftsdorp, a dormant Opposition, and a disengaged people look towards the challenges facing Sri Lanka in 2013, the bulk of them perceived to be from across its borders, while the true enemy – apathy in the face of arrogant power – lies within

The old world is dying away, and the new world struggles to come forth: now is the time of monsters – Antonio Gramsci

One week after its installation, the new order at Hulftsdorp is making sweeping changes to the administration of the country’s apex court house.

The Supreme Court Registrar Duminda Mudunkotuwa and Secretary to impeached Chief Justice Shirani Bandaranayake, Geethani Wijesinghe will be transferred to Balangoda and Ruwanwella respectively as District Judges effective today. Both officials, requested the transfers, official reports say. Ironically, they leave their offices at the Superior Court Complex on the same day that ceremonial sittings were held the court house to welcome the new Chief Justice, Mohan Peiris.

Mired in controversy, the ceremonial sitting for the country’s 44th holder of the office of Chief Justice was blacked out to all local and international media, with only the state-controlled media permitted to enter the Supreme Court that police personnel once again made off limits to journalists and photographers. It also marked the first time in history that the Bar Association President and the country’s most eminent lawyers were absent at this traditional function to welcome a new Chief Justice.

During an extraordinary general meeting in December, some 3,000 members of the Bar Association passed a resolution to refrain from attending the ceremonial sitting of a successor if Chief Justice Bandaranayake was unlawfully impeached. Traditionally, a ceremonial sitting is held after the Bar Association makes an official request for an opportunity to welcome a new chief justice, in a time honoured legal tradition. During the function, two addresses are made, one by the President of the Bar Association as the head of the unofficial bar, and the Attorney General, as the head of the official bar.

Blackout                                                      Read More

Video: Alan Keenan’s Keynote Address At Canadian Tamil Congress’ Annual Dinner

By Colombo Telegraph -January 24, 2013

Alan Keenan of International Crisis Group delivered the keynote address at Canadian Tamil Congress’ Annual Dinner on Saturday, January 19, 2013.

Read the text here

Video courtesy  Canadian Tamil Congress

Leading silk (president’s counsel) and BASL were not there to grace the ceremonial welcome of Mohan Pieris as Thief Justice

(Lanka-e-News -23.Jan.11.00PM) The ceremonial sitting that was held in breach of traditions that has been followed for well over 200 years was boycotted by Bar Association of Sri Lanka and all leading Presidents’ Counsel in the Country.

For the first time in the history the Ceremonial sitting to welcome new Thief Justice was held under heavy police protection as has never seen before.

Those who did not grace the occasion and notably absent President’s Counsel were Wijedasa Rajapakse, K. Kanag-Isvaran, Romesh de Silva, Ikram Mohamed, Srinath Perera, Dr. Jayampathy Wickremaratne, Geoffry Alagaratnam, Jayantha Gunasekera, Anil Silva, Ananda Wijesekera, Maureen Seneviratne, Rohan Sahabandu, Uditha Egalahewa, Prasanna Jayewardene, ,Maithree Wickremasinghe, Harsha Amarasekera, Nalin Ladduwahetty and Senior Lawyers S.L. Gunasekera ,I.S. de Silva.

A ceremonial sitting of the Supreme Court is traditionally organized after the Bar Association of Sri Lanka makes an official request for a ceremonial welcome of Judge who is appointed to the Supreme Court.

Without such a request there cannot be an official ceremonial sitting. In the case of appointment of Mohan Peiris as the Thief Justice the Bar Association did not make such a request and in fact passed a resolution unanimously at an extraordinary meeting where well over 3000 of the Lawyers participated that the BASL will not participate in any such ceremonial sitting.

A Ceremonial Sitting involves two traditional addresses – one by the President of the BASL (the head of the unofficial bar) and another by the Attorney General (head of the official bar) welcoming the new appointee to office. The President of the BASL and its members cannot participate in any ceremony to welcome Pieris in keeping with the resolution of the BASL general body. All Attorneys at Law are members of the BASL, including the officers of the Attorney General’s Department.

In keeping with that resolution the Bar Association and its members and leading Presidents 
Counsel who form the inner Bar did not grace the occasion.

There were pro Government Lawyers who are holding key posts in the Government Corporations and Departments who participated. There was not a single President’s Counsel with a standing who was willing to break the tradition and go against the resolution passed by Bar Association of Sri Lanka

However, breaking all traditions Razeek Zarook, President’s Counsel the recently appointed Chairman of the Bank of Ceylon, has made a welcome speech.

World judges condemn Sri Lanka on chief justice sacking

GENEVA | Wed Jan 23, 2013 9:20pm IST

(Reuters) - Leading judges and jurists from around the world, many from developing countries, on Wednesday condemned the Sri Lankan government's sacking of the country's chief justice, arguing it violated international law.

The 44-strong group, all members of the Geneva Centre for the Independence of Judges and Lawyers (CIJL), called for the immediate reinstatement of Shirani Bandaranayake.

At the same time, the head of the Geneva-based International Commission of Jurists (ICJ), which works to promote the rule of law, said the move had set Sri Lanka on the path toward authoritarian rule.

The judges' strictures were issued in a letter to Sri Lankan President Mahinda Rajapaksa and his brother, the speaker of parliament Chamal Rajapaksa from the ICJ and the CIJL.

It was the latest of a series of criticisms from independent organisations and United Nations officials in Geneva since President Rajapaksa last week dismissed Bandaranayake as chief justice and appointed one of his allies in her place.

"We are gravely concerned that the recent action to remove the chief justice have been taken in contravention of the (Sri Lankan) constitution, and international human rights law and standards, including the right to a fair hearing, and the rule of law," the letter said.

Former attorney-general Mohan Peiris, whom Rajapaksa named as new chief justice, was widely known "for consistently blocking efforts to hold state officials accountable for gross human rights violations," it said.

The parliamentary impeachment of Bandaranayake, on which the president based his decision to remove her, and her dismissal "disregarded international standards of judicial independence and minimum guarantees of due process and fair trial," it added.

ICJ Secretary General Wilder Tayler, a Uruguayan lawyer, said in a statement the Rajapaksa administration "has brought Sri Lanka within steps of authoritarian rule, dismantling the system of checks and balances and eviscerating judicial independence."

(Reporting by Robert Evans; Editing by Jon Hemming)

Change in Sri Lanka not a sprint, it’s a marathon: High commissioner

Baird called her on the carpet to express Canada’s ‘deep concern’ with the country.

Ally Foster-Wednesday, 01/23/2013

Foreign Minister John Baird has called in Sri Lanka’s high commissioner to Canada to discuss Canada’s “deep concern” with the country, according to his spokesperson.

The country is facing growing pressure from all major parties in Canadian Parliament to improve its human rights record. But Sri Lankan High Commissioner Chitranganee Wagiswara argues that after an almost 30-year civil war, significant social change in the country is not a sprint—it’s a marathon. 

The parties are urging Sri Lanka to boost reconciliation between groups involved in the war. If the situation doesn’t improve, the parties have suggested Canada minimize (or fully stop) its participation in a high-level fall Commonwealth meeting.

Meanwhile, during his Jan. 7 visit to the island—which lies off the southern coast of India—Immigration Minister Jason Kenney gave a stern warning to government officials there.

A press release said he stated that Canada is disappointed with post-war reconciliation. Ethnic Tamils had been fighting to separate from the majority-Sinhalese country.

“Canada wants to see a successful 2013 Commonwealth Heads of Government Meeting, but as host of the event, Sri Lanka is under close scrutiny for its adherence to Commonwealth values and principles,” the press release quoted Mr. Kenney as saying. 

“Canada’s level of representation at this meeting will depend on real progress on political reconciliation and accountability, including an independent investigation of allegations of human rights violations endured by civilians at the hands of both sides during the civil war.”

Unhappy with the Sri Lankan’s government’s impeachment of a Supreme Court justice, interim Liberal leader Bob Rae also called for more action in a Jan. 10 press release. He urged Mr. Baird to “immediately raise this issue with the Commonwealth Secretary-General and the Commonwealth Ministerial Action Group, whose mandate includes disciplining violations of the association’s basic principles.”

Mr. Baird said in a press release that he would be pushing the issue during the next the next Commonwealth Ministerial Action Group meeting.

The prime minister’s office also sent out a press release on the subject. 

Taking an even stronger stance, the NDP released a statement Jan. 13 from foreign affairs critic Paul Dewar, stating that “We strongly urge the Canadian government to now state unequivocally that Canada will not attend this October’s Commonwealth Heads of Government Meeting.”

Rebuilding can take a generation

The latest concerns sprouted when, in early January, the Sri Lankan president removed the country’s chief justice following an impeachment process that the Canadian government said lacked transparency and was highly politicized. 

But Ms. Wagiswara told Embassy during an interview in her office that the Sri Lankan government followed the impeachment process “step-by-step” as it is laid out in the constitution.

Any issue with a judge can be dealt with through law or standing orders, she said.

The government followed the standing orders process.

Ms. Wagiswara said the parliamentary speaker appointed an 11-member committee: seven from the leading party and four from the opposition. 

The committee investigated and their findings were tabled in parliament, she said. Within a month, there was a debate among all MPs and the motion to impeach was passed. 

Sri Lanka currently has a majority government.

The president, who can either dismiss or accept the impeachment, supported it, she said. The whole process took around two months, she added.

According to Al Jazeera, Chief Justice Shirani Bandaranayake was accused of financial impropriety, bias, and abuse of power—all of which she disputes. Critics of the process say she was unfairly targeted for ruling against a government development bill. 

Ms. Wagiswara said that Sri Lanka wants “all countries to participate” in the Commonwealth meeting, and added that Canada is the only country that has threatened to not take part.  

She also stressed that the civil war ended less than four years ago.

“It was a very difficult conflict, and there are so many issues,” she said, listing the work that has been done to rebuild destroyed infrastructure, rehabilitate child soldiers, and to successfully clear 98 per cent of the landmines that lay hidden. 

But, she said the relationship between the Tamils and the Sinhalese is not as easy to rebuild as buildings or bridges. 

“What happened over 30 years we cannot solve in three, or four, or five years,” she argued. “It often takes a generation.”

Ms. Wagiswara said many programs currently running are meant to bring both Tamil and Sinhalese youth together to learn about each other’s community, and understand one another. 

Language training is also being given so that citizens can better interact, she said.

Ms. Wagiswara said her government wants the international community to know that the Sri Lankan government accepts “that there are outstanding issues to be addressed,” but argued that when other countries are consistently pointing fingers at Sri Lanka’s faults, it “takes away our focus because we have to keep defending.”

“We would want Mr. Baird, or members of Parliament to...go to Sri Lanka and see for themselves what is being done,” she added.

This invitation has been extended before. According to media reports from Colombo, Sri Lanka’s external affairs minister, G. L. Peiris, told Mr. Kenney during his visit that there was an open invitation for Mr. Baird to visit the country to see what has been accomplished since the war.

When asked if Mr. Baird intended to R.S.V.P, his office only wrote that “Direct engagement with the Government of Sri Lanka at all levels is important” and highlighted that there were high-level Canadian visits to the country in 2012. 

When asked when Canada would decide on its participation in the Commonwealth meeting, Mr. Baird’s press secretary, Rick Roth, wrote that “There is still time for the Government of Sri Lanka to demonstrate good faith in advance” of the meeting.

 “Canada will continue to monitor developments closely and make a final decision based on assessment of the situation on the ground closer to the time.”

Mr. Roth outlined that “Canada needs to see positive signs in the area of human rights, political reconciliation, democratic values and accountability” before attending.

Specifically, Canada wants the Sri Lankan government to implement all recommendations of a post-war Lessons Learnt and Reconciliation Commission, and steps outlined in its own National Action Plan, wrote Mr. Roth. 

Meanwhile, while Ms. Wagiswara said she has found Canadian MPs and ministers very accessible, Mr. Roth confirmed that the she was “called into a meeting at the Department of Foreign Affairs and International Trade on Friday, January 11th, to discuss Canada’s deep concern over recent developments in that country as outlined [by] Prime Minister Harper, Foreign Minister Baird and Immigration Minister Kenney.”  --afoster@embassynews.ca--@AllyFoster1

• 1
• 2
• NEXT PAGE

Wit And Wisdom Of Our Guru: Fr. Tissa Balasuriya

By Leonard Pinto -January 24, 2013 

 Fr. Tissa Balasuriya

Dr. Leonard Pinto

We are saddened by the death of our dear Fr. Tissa Balasuriya at the age of 89. We are equally happy to celebrate his successful, colourful and controversial life.  He was a brilliant intellectual from his youth. Born at remote Kahatagasdigiliya, he graduated from the University of Ceylon in Economics, winning the prestigious Khan Gold Medal. In 1949 he was ordained a Catholic priest in Rome. He further studied philosophy and theology at the Gregorian University in Rome, agricultural economics at Oxford and social-economics at the University of Paris.  On his return, he assisted the illustrious Fr. Peter Pillai as the Registrar of Aquinas University College and became its Rector in 1964 after the death of Fr. Peter Pillai. He broadened the scope of programs at Aquinas and introduced courses in technology, business law, agriculture and religious studies. In 1971 he left Aquinas and founded the Centre for Society and Religion at Deans Road, Maradana.

True intellectual he was, he opened the boundaries between secular socio-economics and sacred theology in his intellectual pursuits and in their application to the society, reiterating what Pope John Paul II wrote, “Every truth, if it is really truth, presents itself as universal, even if it is not the whole truth. If something is true, then it must be true for all people and at all times” (Faith and Reason).

He knew that religion is a super-structure on the society, and that religion and society interacted with each other, sometimes providing emancipation to the individuals and other times providing tools for social, political and economic exploitation. As a student of economics and philosophy he knew the Marxist accusation that “Religion is the opium of masses”, where people are deceived by petty emotional benefits, while the Religion and State supported the powerful exploiters and benefited in return. He questioned the established norms and attempted to develop an Asian Theology that addressed Christianity in the context of political, economic and social realities of Asia, and particularly in Sri Lanka. He attempted to bring peace during the JVP insurrection. He tried to bring the Church in Sri Lanka closer to the Buddhist majority and other denominations and identified himself with the poor, marginalized and the down trodden in his writings and projects. For his straightforward and non-traditional approach, he received bashing from the State and the Church.

True spiritual man he was, he had no ecclesiastical, political or financial ambitions. He had no interest in developing a personality cult. His spirituality was not in magical tongues and faith healing where crowds clap and shout or in converting people by offering them money and gifts, but in quiet reflection, discussion and actions to bring into fruition, Truth, Justice, Love and Peace through Faith in Jesus that prevailed in the Early Christian Community. His Christianity was a living Christianity, where Christian values were visible in life. His book Mary and Human Liberation was an attempt to demythologize sentimentalism around Mary and present her as an enduring and courageous model for Sri Lankan women in their tribulations and difficulties. He was a humble man, for when the Church found error in his perceptions (not in doctrine), he was willing to withdraw them saying that was not what he meant. The Australian Broadcasting Corporation (ABC) in one of its Sunday Compass programs praised him as the only Catholic priest who had returned to the Church after an excommunication. He was true a Catholic Priest; Honest to God, honest to himself and loyal to the Church till the end.

I was fortunate to be one of his students, in the Religious Formation Course at Aquinas from 1966-1967, listening to his lectures on the Early Christian Community, where Basil Fernando (Founder of the Asian Human Rights Commission in Hong Kong, who vehemently champions the press and judicial freedom and human rights in Sri Lanka) and many Sisters and Brothers, who ended up as provincials, rectors, superiors and principals of schools were present. Fr. Balasuriya’s lectures were teeming with dynamic Christian concepts in Greek, such as metanoia (repentance), maranatha (Lord with us), agape (Selfless love of humanity as revealed in Jesus) and eschatology (final events in history and mankind). He kept on harping on the inner change that one must strive to achieve by thirsting for truth and being cut to the heart (Acts 2:27). He emphasized the importance of teaching and preaching the truth in this inner conversion than the external rituals of Baptism (1 Cor. 1:17). As Jesus did, he spurned the external show in worship as “whitened sepulchers” (Mat 23:25-27), worrying about other people’s faults and their non-observance of law as domination and oppression (Mat 7:1-5, Mat 23:1-22, Mark 2: 23-27), high priority given to business in religion as turning the house of prayer into a den of thieves (Mat 21:12-13) and using religion to achieve political agendas as unfortunate (Mat 26:3-5, Jn 11:49-53).

He was humorous in his lectures when he paraphrased the disagreement between Peter and Paul at Antioch in imposing Jewish customs on gentiles given in the Letter to the Galatians (Gal   2:11-14) as, “Paul telling Peter to the face” (munatama kiuva). Referring to Peter opening his mouth and speaking in his sermon (Acts 10:34), Fr. Balasuriya emphasized the importance of opening the mouth before speaking (kata arala katha karanda). These comments were out of context of the serious subject matter he was expounding, but kept the students awake. On another day, we were having a practical class on Ancient Civilizations conducted by an Irish nun, Mother Joseph. Four groups have presented projects on Indian, Egyptian, Babylonian and Persian cultures and two Sisters were performing an Assyrian dance with veils, when Fr. Tissa happened to pass that way on his way to the office. Seeing this dance, he stopped for a while, and as the Sisters left the stage, he came to the stage, used his handkerchief as a veil and attempted to imitate the Assyrian dancers. We spent the rest of the day laughing at the dance performed by the Rector of Aquinas.

Knowing him as our guru, it was obvious that he had no malice when he wrote Mary and Human Liberation,tried to facilitate an unsuccessful peace agreement with JVP’s Chandrasiri Senanayeke and government’s Lalith Athulathmudali or when he went about in civvies and State run newspaper tried to defrock him in the editorial. He was an intellectual who expressed his views irrespective of the consequences, as Socrates did. He was a man of a future era, misunderstood in the present for his non-conformity, as many great men of the world had endured. He was a courageous man, not afraid to express what he thought was correct. He did not lick the sandals of political or ecclesiastical powers to have a comfortable career. He was a man of ethics, as defined by Wittgenstein that right and wrong are determined by our sincere intention rather than what we pretend to do as right. He was a strong follower of Jesus, as he followed him in championing Social Justice. May he receive his heavenly reward and meet the Divine Master in joy for a life fruitfully spent.