Reissue of the appeal for financial aid to save the life of Wengadasalam Sudeshkar facing the death sentence in Qatar

Wednesday, 06 February 2013

The Asian Human Rights Commission has received many responses from concerned persons in several countries regarding the appeal we made on behalf of Mr. Wengadasalam Sudeshkar. Several persons have indicated to us that they are contacting friends and well-wishers to assist in the saving of this young man's life.

The Asian Human Rights Commission has so far been able to transmit to the mother of Sudeshkar Rs. 400,000/= which is around US$ 3,167. The total amount required is US$ 28,000.

We are reissuing the appeal together with the bank details for transmission of any assistance and urge that as time available is short that contributions are made on an urgent basis.

WORLD: Seeking financial aid to save 22-year-old Mr. Wengadasalam Sudeshkar from execution in Qatar

Earlier, the Asian Human Rights Commission (AHRC) informed the public in Sri Lanka and abroad about the possibility of yet another person being beheaded in the Middle East like the earlier incident of Ms. Rizana Nafeek. Mr. Wengadasalam Sudeshkar was sentenced to death on December 31, 2012. At the time of the incident that caused an unintentional death, for which Sudeshkar was tried, he was 20 years and six months of age.

After negotiations held by the Sudeshkar's relatives, with the family of the deceased, the deceased's family expressed their willingness to enter into a settlement on the case, given the circumstances of the incident that led to the death of their family member. According to the law prevailing in Qatar, it is permissible to arrive at such a settlement on the basis of the payment of what is known as 'blood money'.

The sum that has been agreed upon is Rs. 3.5 Million, which amounts to US$ 28,000 (QAR 100,000).

The AHRC has earlier published the letters written to His Excellency President Mahinda Rajapaksa and to the Sri Lanka Bureau of Foreign Employment. Despite making these urgent requests it has not been possible to get any response from the Sri Lankan authorities guaranteeing assistance to make this payment.

Mr. Wengadasalam Sudeshkar comes from a very poor family living Kala Eliya, Sri Lanka. His mother has appealed for support to rescue her son, stating that the family is not in a position to provide this 'blood money'.

After publication of the appeals made to the Sri Lankan President, the AHRC has received many responses requesting that under these circumstances the only practical course of action available is to make a public appeal for the collection of this sum in order to save the life of this young man who faces the imminent threat of execution.

Under these circumstances, the AHRC is launching this fund raising campaign to raise the necessary sum to support the family of Mr. Wengadasalam Sudeshkar to enable them to take the necessary steps to rescue their son.

We are urging everyone to support this call with the view to avoid another tragedy like that of Ms. Rizana Nafeek. As a gesture of the AHRC's own commitment, it will contribute initially US$ 3,000.00 for this fund. We are calling upon all persons of good will to contribute generously for this purpose. The AHRC undertakes to be responsible for all issues relating to accountability for all monies received.

The following account has been opened for the specific purpose of this fund. The account bearer, the Asian Legal Resource Centre is a sister organisation of the AHRC.

Bank information of Asian Legal Resource Centre Ltd.

Name of the Bank: Hang Seng Bank Ltd.

Address of the Bank:

Hankow Road Branch

4 Hankow Road

Tsim Sha Tsui

Kowloon, Hong Kong

Swift code: HASEHKHH

Account no.: 295-8-710341 (Multi Currency Saving Account)

Account holder: Asian Legal Resource Centre Ltd.

Kindly inform us at ahrc@ahrc.asia of any contributions made so that we can keep a track of these and deal with the issue in an expeditious manner as required under these circumstances.

For further information please see the Open Letter written to the President of Sri Lanka here.

Learn Lessons And Reconcile With Failures!

By Paul Newman -February 5, 2013 

Dr. Paul Newman

On the 4^th of February 2013 marking the 65^th Independence Day of Sri Lanka, its President Mahinda Rajapaksa, shut all doors on the question of greater autonomy to the Tamil areas of the North and East. By this he has virtually told the UN, India and the  International Community that he does not care for their views and the Tamils will be subjugated to more humiliations in future.

“The U.N. charter gives no powers to interfere in internal affairs of countries,” Mr Rajapaksa said, quoting Article 2 of the UN charter. Dismissing criticism against his government as baseless misinformation, Mr. Rajapaksa invited critics to “come over and see for yourselves”.

This is what exactly Justice Verma of India wanted to do but he was refused visa on flimsical grounds, there are scores of others who wanted to see for themselves but they were never allowed, with only the notable exception of a handful of Indian lullaby singing politicians who preferred not to hurt the sentiments of Mahinda at the expense of crushing the Tamils rights.

People who know Mr.Mahinda also know too very well that he will not stop at just denying autonomy to the Tamils, he will have other sinister designs over a period of time to win the Sinhalese and establish ‘Dynastic  Democracy’. History is a great teacher and very few have learnt from knowing the history of Mr.Mahinda. In the 2004 the then President Mrs.Chandrika Kumaratunge made him the Prime Minister and later became the Presidential candidate in 2005. After becoming President Mahinda dumped Madam Chandrika into wilderness and she looks for an opportunity to reassert her claim in the Sri Lankan Freedom Party.

The LTTE helped him a great deal in his first Presidential elections victory by a very slender margin over Ranil Wickremasinghe when the organization asked the Tamils to boycott the elections. The boycott of the Tamils inspired by the LTTE’s call helped Mahinda, seen as a hardliner to win the 2005 election by less than 2% votes. One must also note that the Ranil was extremely popular with the Tamils as the chief architect of the 2002 Ceasefire Agreement. The rest is history, the next move of Mahinda was to exterminate the LTTE from 2006 onwards ending the very existence of the LTTE on Sri Lankan soil in May 2009.

Here one person who took the lead in defeating the LTTE militarily was General Sarath Fonseka who went all out to achieve what no other Sri Lankan had achieved in the past, the military defeat of the LTTE. Sarath Fonseka became a National Hero along with President Mahinda Rajapaksa. In Sri Lanka there can be only one National Hero and that has to be Mahinda. Immediately Sarath Fonseka was forced to resign as the Chief of Defence Staff in November 2009 and he announced his candidature to the Presidential elections to face his former boss, President Mahinda. This could not be digested by Mahinda and Sarath Fonseka was arrested after his defeat in the January 2010 elections. He was released only in 2012 after International Intervention and promises that he will not speak out against the President.

In 2009 India went out of its way at the UN to justify and defend the gruesome Genocide of the Tamils as the first victory of a country over terrorism. Prior to that they were part of the scheming to defeat the LTTE in its final war. Since then Mahinda Rajapaksa and his brothers have always preferred China over India for their economic and strategic needs, leaving India with a bitter feeling. Within a span of three months what is the need for Mahinda to visit India? India knows there would be protests in Tamilnadu during his forthcoming visit, but they are not strong enough to tell him not to enter India like the way Malaysia did it in December 2012. Now as an Indian, one wonders whether India needs Sri Lanka or Sri Lanka needs India more!

In 2009 Ban Ki Moon, played into Mahinda’s hands as he thankfully visited the war zones a few days after the war was over and issued a joint statement that there would be Independent Inquiry into War Crimes and justice would be done to the Tamils. When Ban Ki Moon appointed the three member panel out of compulsion, Sri Lanka demonized him, the UN staff was kept as hostage in the UN building in Colombo and Ban Ki Moon became an enemy of not just Mahinda but the ultra national Sinhalese too.

Shirani Bandaranayake was appointed as the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court by Mahinda Rajapakse on 18^th May 2011, She was expected to help the ruling class, when she did not budge, her political bosses did not take kindly to the fact that she had begun to act independently.  On January 13, Rajapaksa dismissed the Chief Justice without following the due process of law, the International community condemned it but Mahinda does not care for such condemnations anymore as he knows the weakness of the International Community and the UN which cannot take any action against him or his country.

Tamara Kunanayagam, the Sri Lankan Ambassador to the UN at Geneva had worked tirelessly to legitimize all the wrong doings of the MR regime, despite her efforts Sri Lanka was forced to bite the dust during the 19^thUN Human Rights Council in March 2012. She was a personal friend of Mahinda since the 1980s, but that defeat dented the image of MR and Tamara became the scapegoat as she was shunted out of Geneva despite the whole world acknowledging her great diplomatic skills.

With the term of China and Russia coming to an end at the UNHRC as voting members among the 47 countries, Sri Lanka is once again on the prowl to find confirmed voters. In his quest to get India’s vote Mahinda is on a pilgrimage to India, to appease the Hindu sentiments by visiting Tirupathi after destroying Hindu temples and culture in country and to please his countrymen by visiting Bodhgaya and also to lay a new friendship foundation with Mr.Nitesh Kumar, the Chief Minister of Bihar who could play a major role in 2014 when a new Union government is formed in New Delhi.

After his pilgrimage MR would seek the help of the ever helpful Manmohan Singh to rescue Sri Lanka once again. It is here one must acknowledge the Maverick Master manipulator cum maneuveror Mahinda as “The politician of his time”. He knows a defeat at the 22^nd UNHRC will have no impact on his political career or his coffers but he does not want to face an International defeat and dent his image internationally, once again India holds the key for his victory or defeat. It all depends whether India has learnt its lessons and vote against his regime or history repeats itself, we have to reconcile with failures in our foreign policy.

*The author holds a Doctorate of Philosophy on ‘Internal Displacement and Human Rights situation in Northern Sri Lanka from Bangalore University. He was one of the four public speakers at the Permanent People’s Tribunal on War Crimes against Sri Lanka.

Hushing up crimes: Politics of deceptions, fabrications and lies

In the frantic environment of an election race, there is always one favourite that starts at Black Caviar odds.

You can bet the house that misrepresentations, deceptions, fabrications and unashamed lies will begin to flow like a mountain stream in spring. There is a pathological need among our elected officials for the slightest advantage, and often they do whatever it takes to crib a centimetre or two over an opponent. Once it succeeds, often due to sloppy media work, there’s no stopping them.

It is both instructive, and disturbing, to see the manner in which the federal election campaign has begun, with a flood of misleading information being fed into the public record by such high-profile political leaders as Foreign Affairs Minister Bob Carr, Foreign Affairs spokesperson and deputy Coalition leader, Julie Bishop and Coalition Immigration spokesperson, Scott Morrison.

'No evidence of persecution'

Bishop, Morrison and Coalition Customs spokesperson, Michael Keenan, went to Sri Lanka on a "fact-finding mission" last week. They came back with glowing reports of life there, not least for Tamils whom they said, contrary to so many independent reports, were living peacefully now that the war was over.

Bishop said she saw or heard no evidence of the persecution of Tamils during her visit with Tamil MPs and others in the north, where most Tamils live. Morrison told a press conference upon his return people who talked about persecution of Tamils were talking in the past. He said things had changed markedly from the days of white van disappearances and torture chambers. Get up to date, he urged critics of the Rajapaksa regime.

According to the Tamil National Alliance MP, Sivagnanam Sritharan, the trio were brought up to date in a 90-minute meeting in his office in the northern town of Kilinochchi last Monday week.

Sritharan later told a Canadian Tamil radio show, an interview broadcast at 3CR in Melbourne last Wednesday, he had informed them that Sri Lankan intelligence officers had raided his office two weeks earlier and jailed two of his staff members, who remain behind bars. He said he gave Bishop documents about the raid. "The Australians asked us why Tamil refugees are choosing to come to Australia. We made it very clear that our people do not have peace. They live in fear," Sritharan said.

"Even for me as a politican I am facing challenges to exercise my rights. Therefore it is very difficult for an average Tamil to live here. Hence, they choose to go to Australia, a country that will save lives, that respects human rights."

A returned Tamil refugee, Krishnan Prttheepan, from Batticaloa in eastern Sri Lanka, told the ABC’s 7.30 report in December all about this fear. He said he had claimed political asylum because the Sri Lankan government suspected him of being linked to the now-defunct Tamil Tigers.

"I took the risk of dying in the sea because I know I will die here. But even if I reached Australia and died there, that would be better than dying here in Sri Lanka," he told reporter Michael Edwards.

Sritharan also revealed why villagers in the Mullaitivu district, who were visited by Bishop and Morrison, were so reticent to speak to them. "There was military presence everywhere. You could see Sri Lankan intelligence people standing nearby holding mobile phones. People were very scared and stayed back. You could see in their faces they were frightened. We told the Australians this is the reality for Tamils in Sri Lanka," he said.

Promoting inhuman policies

Bishop and co went to Sri Lanka with one objective; to promote an inhumane policy that includes sending all refugees back, regardless of asylum claims. It’s a bit like the editor of a tabloid newspaper who writes his front-page headline at morning conference and says to a reporter: "Go get me a story to fit it."

They appeared determined to find the facts to fit their story, which is that all Sinhalese and Tamil refugees are economic migrants, not desperate people fleeing from danger. Sell this one to the Australian public and they would have carte blanche to be as callous and heartless as they plan to be once in office.

Carr is no different. He went to Sri Lanka in December with an election in mind and the objective of getting help to stop the boats. Using the "whatever-it-takes" two-step, he danced cheek-to-cheek with the dictatorial leader of a regime accused of war crimes, crimes against humanity and on-going persecution of Tamils. Then he had the temerity to tell Australian TV that he believed it was safe to return Tamil refugees to Sri Lanka, a mere six weeks after the Australian delegate to the UN Human Rights Council told Sri Lanka to "reduce and eliminate all cases of abuse, torture or mistreatment by police and security forces … and all cases of abductions and disappearances."

The latest Human Rights Watch report on Sri Lanka for 2012 describes the regime as a brutal, recalcitrant denier of democratic rights that tortures its own citizens. "Overly-broad detention powers remained in place," says the report. "Several thousand people continued to be detained without charge or trial. State security forces committed arbitrary arrests and torture against Tamils. Tamils who returned to Sri Lanka, including deported asylum seekers, reported being detained. A number reported being tortured by the Central Intelligence Department and other security forces."

Independent evidence, no matter how compelling, does not count with the likes of Carr, Bishop and Morrison.

Indeed, nothing counts for them on refugee issues, except repeating the mantra of "economic migrants" and "queue-jumping illegals" often enough to gain public acceptance for their cruel policies.

© New Matilda

---

Trevor Grant is a former chief cricket writer at The Age, and
now works withthe Boycott Sri Lanka Cricket Campaign and the Refugee Action Collective.

One Peiris Blames Another Pieris; Nothing Was Done About The LLRC Action Plan

By Rajiva Wijesinha -February 6, 2013 

Prof Rajiva Wijesinha

Reconciliation: Looking Forward xv – A Silver Lining?

I have discussed previously the different motivations of those criticize us internationally, and in particular at the Human Rights Council in Geneva. The first motive is devious, and involves claiming that we have committed War Crimes. The second is in essence laudable, since it is designed to push us towards greater pluralism and political equity. This is essential for Reconciliation, and is bound up with implementation of the recommendations of the Lessons Learnt and Reconciliation Commission. However, concentrating on that would I think yield better results, whereas the strategy now employed simply increases the influence of those who have no desire to move in such directions.

The third motive is the one expressed by the Americans, and others in recent times, namely worries caused by the impeachment of the Chief Justice. While I can understand such worries, they have little connection with either the issue of War Crimes or the need for greater pluralism. Though confusion has been caused by the irritation caused by the judgment delivered by Shirani Bandaranayaka with regard to the Divineguma Bill, it was not at all difficult for government to overcome the problems raised, by following the line the Supreme Court had in fact indicated.

Though I was sorry about the manner of the impeachment, I believe that there is a particularly welcome silver lining in this particular cloud, and it should help us to move forward on the most important issue that agitates our critics both here and abroad. I refer to progress on Reconciliation, which is painfully slow.

One reason for this is the lack of coherence with regard to implementation of the Action Plan based on the LLRC Recommendations. Designing such a plan was initially entrusted to the Ministry of External Affairs under the guidance of Mohan Peiris, but unfortunately nothing was done about this, contrary to the impression given to the President. As with implementation of the Interim Recommendations of the LLRC, he was assured that all was going well, whereas in fact progress was minimal, and the structures he thought had been put in place were not functioning. That is why, after the Geneva Resolution last year, preparation of an Action Plan was entrusted to Lalith Weeratunge, who turned up trumps, with the assistance of several efficient bureaucrats, including his Deputy.

I do not think it is fair to blame Mohan Pieris alone for all this. The man was simply overwhelmed with work, and it was foolish of government to thrust so much upon someone with little previous experience of government mechanisms, especially at a stage when he had difficulties with senior members of the Attorney General’s Department which he had been appointed to head from outside. I said as much to the Minister of External Affairs, who was critical of Mohan’s failure in New York to handle the impending Darusman Reportsatisfactorily, even though it was quite unfair to have expected him to achieve anything when our policy in that regard was incoherent.

When I told the Minister that Mohan should not have been asked to do so much, his response was that he should not have undertaken the task if he could not do it. That was the first occasion on which I was critical of the Minister, having previously assumed that he was the right man for the job. I told him that people were saying the same about him, which I do not think pleased him, but I fear that with every day that passes I am conscious that untold damage is being done to the country by the Minister taking on much more than he can chew. The latest confusion about whether Minister Mahinda Samarasinghe will lead the delegation to Geneva or not, combined with him not being kept informed about the High Commissioner’s communiqués, is symptomatic of the incapacity to build up a team that will probably destroy us.

For the moment though, with Mohan Pieris elevated to a position in which he  cannot undertake other responsibilities, perhaps implementation of the Action Plan will be entrusted to a more dedicated team which is able to ensure cooperation, communication and productive team work. If that happens, perhaps Shirani Bandaranayake would not have been impeached in vain.  

Gandhian Values In Participatory Management

By R. Hariharan -February 6, 2013 

Col. (retd) R.Hariharan

A retired army veteran from the Military Intelligence who participated in wars and dealt with traffickers, forgers, criminals etc for nearly three decades speaking about Gandhian values may sound like an oxymoron. 

I make no claim to be an expert either on Gandhi or on Gandhian values in participatory management the subject of my speech today. But I come from a family whose values were conditioned by Gandhian thoughts from 1930 to 1947 when my father actively participated in Gandhiji’s freedom struggle. These family values imbibed in childhood have guided me most of the times in my personal and professional life. I used these values to successfully cruise through some of the acid tests I had to face in the army – the biggest practitioner of participatory management.

A superficial view of Gandhiji would only see a number of contradictions in his life. He spoke of grass root participation and freedom for Indians, yet he ensured the Congress party chose its leader by consensus and not free vote. He appealed to the conscience of the rich to part with their wealth to benefit the poor, yet he went on a hunger strike to force independent India to share the united India’s treasury on Pakistan’s terms. However, a deeper study of his life and actions would reveal how he introspected and tried to correct himself to overcome his weaknesses. That is what made Gandhiji a leader of different calibre.

Gandhiji’s contribution was much more than leading the non-violent struggle to achieve India’s freedom. He was a great visionary with a universal idiom who recognized syncretism of Indian society that transcends differences of religion, caste, language and ethnic differences as its strength. He used it with great success to rally the masses in the freedom struggle.  Thus he reinforced India’s national identity and enabled the people to regain not only their freedom but their pride and dignity, eroded by two centuries of colonial rule.

Gandhiji’s greatest achievement was in motivating and mobilizing the masses of India across the states, regardless of their differences in language, religion, caste, creed and sex, to come together and fight for the cause of freedom under the banner of Indian National Congress. There cannot be a greater example of participatory management than this.                                   Read More

Captain arrested in Hijaab

WEDNESDAY, 06 FEBRUARY 2013

An Army Capatin dressed in a Hijaab and armed with a toy pistol and knife attempting to rob the Kandy branch of the National Savings Bank was arrested by the Kandy Police this morning.

The person had acted suspiciously pretending to be a woman after which the security officers of the bank had been activated.

Initial investigations revealed that the person was an Army officer working in Kothmale.

UK’s CHOGM attendance undecided – Alistair Burt

2013-02-06  UK Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, Alistair Burt, said that UK has not yet decided on the level of any attendance at CHOGM. The minister was participating in a live Q&A session on Sri Lanka via twitter, Alistair Burt ‏@AlistairBurtFCO, yesterday. Following are the tweeted questions by various individuals and groups, and the answers by Alistair Burt:    Q: Tell us if your Prime Minister (of UK) may not go to Sri Lanka for CHOGM.  A: I made it clear that UK has not yet decided on the level of any attendance at CHOGM. Q: Would UK ask CMAG to discuss Sri Lanka and possible venue change for CHOGM 2013? A: UK not on CMAG. Repeat that we expect host to demonstrate strong Commonwealth values. Q: What actions is UK taking to ensure Sri Lanka is effectively committed to end impunity for war crimes? A: Raised in UPR in Geneva, supported UN HRC resolution in March, continue to press with govt. Despite this, not enough progress. Q: Freedom from Torture is filing new evidence with UN. Can UK apply more pressure to SL? A: UK concerned about human rights in SL including torture. Support HRC action. Q: Will UK support a call from Tamils to hold a referendum to give expression to their desire re a political solution? A: Details of political settlement must be for Sri Lankans themselves. We encourage TNA and govt. to make serious progress.  GOSL brought forward an action plan with timelines. We welcomed this and encourage progress in accordance. Q: Is Colombo a proper place for holding the CHOGM despite Sri Lanka’s poor human rights record? A: We look to host of CHOGM to adhere to Commonwealth values. Location for CHOGM was Commonwealth’s choice. Q: When you see progress, how would you define reconciliation, as it applies to Sri Lanka? A: Physical change such as roads or return from camps is genuine but not sufficient. Political settlement fundamental. Q: Will the UK support resolution at Human Rights Council 22 which addresses deteriorating human rights in Sri Lanka? A: Yes. Still believe that although progress has been made, much remains to be done. Hope SL Govt. will work constructively. Q: Whether you or Her Majesty’s Government considers May 2009 is the end of the 30-year-old conflict in Sri Lanka? A: The war ended in 2009 but the route of conflict as set out by LLRC still needs to be addressed. Q: How’s UK protecting Sri Lankan human rights defenders who call for accountability for human rights violations? A: Essential that human rights defenders are free to speak out as we continue to make clear to SL authorities. Q: In what ways is the Govt. of Sri Lanka upholding Commonwealth values? A: We look to SL to demonstrate those Commonwealth values of good governance, rule of law and human rights. Q: In what ways is the Govt. of Sri Lanka upholding Commonwealth values? A: It is obvious we are prepared to challenge where there are concerns about these values. Q: What is your vision for Sri Lanka? A: An understanding of the past, reconciliation in the present and a future based on Commonwealth values. Take statements of visit as a whole. Have always made clear resp of all parties to conflict. Role of LTTE must not be minimized. Q: When you see progress, how would you define reconciliation, as it applies to Sri Lanka? A: Physical change such as roads or return from camps is genuine but not sufficient. Political settlement fundamental.

Regulatory Capture: The Worst Public Enemy Imaginable

By W.A. Wijewardena -February 5, 2013 

Dr W.A. Wijewardena

The banning of sand mining in rivers in Sri Lanka

In 2008, Sri Lankan authorities, supported by its Supreme Court, banned sand mining in rivers and internal reservoirs. The measure was well-intentioned as proclaimed by many experts on the subject. According to them, sand mining in rivers had caused irreversible environmental damage. Some of these damages had been documented and could not be ignored: Sand mining had caused sea water to seep inland through receded river mouths, destroyed the now fragile river banks and lowered the water table in adjoining areas making the land dry and unsuitable for cultivation. On top of this, rivers which are the main contributors to the natural formation of Sri Lanka’s sandy beaches by depositing the sand which they carry constantly could not do, according to experts, their job effectively without a sufficient quantity of sand available in them. Hence, the country faced the risk of faster sea erosion which had to be prevented through artificial means at great costs. Hence, despite the unaffordable increase in the price of sand which in turn raised the cost of construction, everyone hailed it as a public policy taken in the right direction. So the hope of the public that the measure would bring overall good to society ran very high and there was no doubt about its failure on any count.

The abuse of the good-intentioned public intervention- Read More

Govt rejects resolutions against Sri Lanka - Minister

CHAMIKARA WEERASINGHE-Wednesday, 6 February 2013

The government will not welcome any US-sponsored resolution against Sri Lanka at the UN Human Rights Council sessions to be held in Geneva next month, Chief Government Whip and Water Supply and Drainage Minister Dinesh Gunawardena told the Daily News.

Minister Dinesh Gunawardena

"We will explain our human right standards and progress achieved in the sphere of national reconciliation in terms of the previous UN resolution," Minister Gunawardena said.

"This is not the first time that US -sponsored resolutions have come against sovereign states in Asia at the UNHRC. We will not welcome any resolution against the country at the upcoming Geneva sessions since we have fulfilled requirements of the UN as a member country," he said.

Sri Lanka will face a review on its progress achieved in the implementation of the recommendations of the Lessons Learnt and Reconciliation Commission(LLRC) report and the Human Rights Action Plan. The Minister said " representatives of the US and other UN member countries can visit Sri Lanka and eyewitness the progress in the spheres of post-war development and national reconciliation."

"People's rights have been established by the government. The people are enjoying freedom of movement after a three decade war," he said.

"The country introduced a Human Rights Action Plan by the UN, fulfilling its commitments to the UN. Secretary to the President Lalith Weerathinga carried out the implementation of the LLRC recommendations.

"Steps have been taken by the government to make constitutional changes that are necessary to implement some recommendations in the LLRC report," he said.

"The government is taking steps to change the electoral system. Tamil National Alliance(TNA)'s reluctance to participate in the Parliamentary Select Committee to reach a consensus on sensitive issues on the devolution of power, has delayed the implementation of some recommendations of the LLRC report," he said.

The decision to appoint a Parliamentary Select Committee to resolve political issues came after lengthy discussions. Both the TNA and the United National Party (UNP) agreed to participate in it.

But the TNA abstained from participating in the process for over a year, which delayed in reaching a legislative consensus on some matters, the minister said.

The Constitution needs to be amended in relation to changes in the field of international humanitarian law, Minister Gunawardena said.