Sri Lankan garments losing market share in US, UK

*Accessing markets in Europe after 2014 would be challenging, says IPS

February 5, 2013, 9:23 pm 

Despite an increase in earnings from garment exports to the US and EU, Sri Lanka is losing market share to competitor countries Bangladesh, India, Vietnam, Pakistan and Cambodia, the Institute of Policy Studies (IPS) says.

"Despite considerable increases in absolute export earnings to both and US and EU markets, it is of concern to note that Sri Lanka’s relative market share in garment exports has been losing ground. The increase in export earnings over the years has been due largely to a shift in Sri Lankan garment exports from the US to EU," the IPS said in its recent flagship publication ‘Sri Lanka: State of the Economy 2012’.

"Sri Lanka has been seeing a steady decline in its market share in the US from 2.3 percent in 2005 to 1.8 percent in 2011. Sri Lanka has been losing out to countries such as Pakistan, Vietnam, Bangladesh, Indonesia and Cambodia. Pakistan’s share in the US apparel market was significantly below that of Sri Lanka in 2005 at 1.8 percent, but is now ahead at 2.1 percent. Diversification of its product range, marketing and large investments in value-added sectors including sewing machines, stitching, knitting, finishing and knitting processing have contributed towards Pakistan’s progress," the IPS said.

"While Sri Lanka has been successful in penetrating the EU market, 2010 and 2011 have seen a marginal decline in the share compared to 2009. Moreover, Sri Lanka is bound to lose its foothold further as the EU GSP Plus concessions eroded. Sri Lanka garment exports will face higher tariffs under the new reforms that would come into effect from 2014. Whereas China and Turkey still account for over half of the garment export share in the EU, Sri Lanka has been losing its market share to competitor countries such as Bangladesh, India, Vietnam, Pakistan and Cambodia. Bangladesh has been particularly successful in penetrating the EU market, with an increase of 6.2 percent in 2009 to 11.2 percent in 2011.

"Bangladesh is already a beneficiary of GSP Plus concessions, and Pakistan will also become eligible under the new reforms. Additionally, India is scheduled to sign a free trade agreement with the EU in 2014 which would guarantee benefits

to Indian garment imports through tariff preferences.

"With competitor countries gaining from such tariff concessions, securing market share in the EU would be a challenging task for Sri Lanka in 2014 and beyond. Therefore, it is imperative that market diversification takes place in Sri Lankan garment exports. In this respect, Sri Lanka has made rapid inroads in to new markets such as Turkey and the United Arab Emirates," the IPS said.

According to latest data available, export earnings from apparel fell 4.6 percent year-on-year to US$ 3,633.3 million during the period January to November 2012.

A leading trade expert said Sri Lanka was losing a considerable amount of foreign exchange each year after losing GSP Plus trade concessions to the European Union.

"After losing GSP Plus we are losing a considerable amount of foreign exchange in terms of opportunity cost. A leading apparel exporter, who I will not name, found that he would have to incur an additional cost of euro 25 million to export to the EU. What did he do? He invested US$ 25 million on a production facility in Vietnam," Asia Shippers’ Council Secretary General Rohan Masakorala said addressing the annual sessions of the Sri Lanka Economic Association last October.

He said that markets in the US and EU were still important to Sri Lanka on account of the buying power of consumers in those destinations.

"We could probably export to China but they would soon copy our products and produce it themselves. India is also a difficult option because of the very difficult bureaucratic environment. These two markets are very different cultures altogether. This is why it is important to enhance our trade with the US and EU," Masakorala said.

Former Director General of Department of Commerce Gomi Senadhira has written extensively on this issue in The Island Financial Review. He argues that by withdrawing GSP Plus, the European Commission had acted in contravention of WTO trade practices.

Industry sources said the country was losing around US$ 1 billion each year on account of the withdrawal of GSP Plus.

Amendments in quota system. Jaffna students affected. However, council sanction not given.

Tuesday , 05 February 2013
Concerning students entry to universities, the district quota system which is  in practice if amended, and according to the recent statistic taken for population in Jaffna , students selected from the Jaffna district to universities, the figures will drastically get affected is according to information.

The district quota system amendment issue was submitted in parliament, and should be processed for the council approval. But still it has not been submitted to the council, hence last year, those selected from the Jaffna district to universities, through the G.C.E.Advance level examination results, there is lesser possibilities the figures getting dropped was said by Jaffna university arts faculty Dean Prof.V.P.Sivanathan.

Sivanathan made this statement, when he was queried after a news item regarding the amendment about the district quota system was published.

He said, according to the population statistics taken in year 1981, the district quota system was decided. That is the selections were done from that year, 40 percent students were selected through aptitude basis, 55 percent students were selected according to their district quota system, and 5 percent students from the backward regions were selected according to quota basis.

After 1981, according to the changes came in the population, amendments were not done in the quota system was said by an official from the University Grants Commission.

According to this, by amending the current quota system, and through the Learnt Lessons and Reconciliation Commission's recommendations, it is explored to introduce a new system was stated.

If changes are brought to the quota system, according to the recently taken population data, there would be a downfall in the figures got selected to the universities from the Jaffna district.

According to the new population data, the population which was 6 lacks of people before now has been reduced to 4 lacks.

According to this, selections to the universities would occur. Due to this reason, the students getting selected from Jaffna, the figures will drop, however according to district quota system, if changes are made, it should be submitted in parliament to acquire approval. In completing this formality, it could be implemented.

However this has not been still submitted to the council for approval, hence there are lesser chances in variations of students’ selection for the universities from the next year G.C.E Advance level examination results.

If amendments are introduced in the district quota system, Jaffna students selected for universities will entirely depend on students talents.  Hence “there is a compulsory requirement for our students to get involved in more learning. Through normal learning, could pass the examination, but due to competition basis,  learning more,  could only achieve to enter universities for which an atmosphere has cropped up” was mentioned by him.

An Open Letter To President Rajapaksa

By Laksiri Fernando -February 6, 2013 

Dr Laksiri Fernando

Dear Mr President,              

I have read your speech at the 65^th Independence Day celebrations in Trincomalee with considerable mixed feelings or rather disagreeing with some of the key pronouncements that you have made particularly on the UN. Even on others, I have serious doubts since your noble pronouncements do not match with the existing realities.

Let me begin with the epitaph of ‘freedom of the Kata Kirilli or Gomriththa.’ It is true that whether our village farmers completely know about the Ambattha Sutta of the Lord Buddha or not they respect the freedom of Gomriththa to nest in their paddy fields without making any hindrance to them as you have correctly mentioned. As the Buddha said “But, Ambattha, even the quails, that little birds, can live freely and chatter freely as they like in their own nests.” But in the case of Sri Lanka, even after the end of the war, how many family nests have been destroyed by thuggery and violence perpetrated through political patronage at various levels? How many voices of ‘chattering’ journalists have been silenced in the North and the South? Do I have to mention about Lasantha, Nimalarajan, Pradeep and long list of others?

Today (5 February 2013) I read your full speech in The Island newspaper, along with the news of the “Monks Killing: Moratuwa Dy Mayor [UPFA] Arrested.” This gruesome killing of the chief monk has happened next to my home village, Koralawella, at a place very dearly known to me at the Egoda Uyana Sunanda Upananda Temple. Isn’t this a continuation of what has been happening in Kelaniya, Kolonnawa and many other places with the patronage of some ruling party politicians? More dangerous in the present incident is the people themselves taking the law unto their own hands and allegedly executing the suspected perpetrators.

I remember how you came to Geneva in 1991 with Vasudeva Nanayakkara with long lists of the disappeared of that time to present before the UN Human Rights Commission, the predecessor of the current Human Rights Council. We met with the delegates of many countries to present the human rights violations in Sri Lanka irrespective of whether they were from the West or the East, but mostly with the Western delegates for obvious reasons. We also interacted with the LTTE representatives without any inhibition. Didn’t we? That time I was in-charge of the human rights program of the World University Service (WUS), Geneva. Those days, the ‘sovereignty’ or ‘meddling in internal affairs’ that you talk about today was not important matters to you. Why?

Let me come to the main point of this letter and that is the UN. I strongly feel that you have not given the correct picture of the UN principles to the people in Sri Lanka; what is given is a partial and a distorted picture. You have quoted three paragraphs of Article 2 of the UN Charter but those are not 1, 2 and 3. Those are paragraphs 1, 4 and 7. There are altogether 7 numbered paragraphs in the Article and they are prefaced by saying “the organization and its members, in pursuit of the purposes stated in Article 1, shall act in accordance with the following principles.” (my emphasis).

The purposes of the UN are grouped into four paragraphs in Article 1 and they broadly relate to (1) maintaining international peace and security (2) to develop friendly relations between countries (3) promotion and respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms and (4) to be a centre for harmonizing these common ends. Therefore the organizational principles that you have quoted are nothing but subject to and in the promotion of the above objectives. If there is any dispute between your government and (some) other countries at present, they are related to human rights and issues of reconciliation after the end of the war. These are also the disputes within the country between your government and the opposition, your government and the TNA and your government and even the judiciary.

The Charter as you know begins with saying, “WE THE PEOPLE OF THE UNITED NATIONS DETERMINED

• to save succeeding generations from the scourge of war, which twice in our lifetime has brought untold sorrow to mankind, and
• to reaffirm faith in fundamental human rights, in the dignity and worth of the human person, in the equal rights of men and women and of nations large and small, and
• to establish conditions under which justice and respect for the obligations arising from treaties and other sources of international law can be maintained, and
• to promote social progress and better standards of life in larger freedom,…”

There is no question or dispute that the UN “is based on the principles of sovereign equality of all its members” as you have said. We don’t need to have any inferiority complex regarding this matter and we should be able to employ the best diplomats who could assert this equality. But unfortunately this is not the case today. According to our own Constitution, the sovereignty of our country is not the property of any government but the right of the people. Please also re-read the exact meaning of the second paragraph that you have quoted as follows.

“All Members shall refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state, or any other manner inconsistent with the Purposes of the United Nations.”

There are two propositions in this paragraph. The first is a complete imperative where “all members shall refrain in their international relations form the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state.” Of course there were instances where this imperative was breached but in the case of Sri Lanka at present there is no threat or risk of using force against the territorial integrity or political independence of our country. All the rhetoric on the subject is related to hiding and camouflaging human rights violations and other atrocities within the country. The second proposition very clearly implies that there are “other manners” in which the member countries could influence other member countries but not “inconsistent with the purposes of the United Nations.”

If the above paragraph is in respect of the member states of the UN, the position in respect of the United Nations itself is entirely different. This is very clear when you interpret the last paragraph that you have quoted. The full paragraph from your own speech is as follows.

“Nothing contained in the present Charter shall authorize the United Nations to intervene in matters which areessentially within the domestic jurisdiction of any state or shall require the Members to submit such matters to settlement under the present Charter.” (my emphasis again).

According to this paragraph there are two areas where even the UN cannot intervene in matters of a member state. One is the area which “requires the members to submit such matters to settlement under the present Charter.” These are explained in Chapters VI and XIV. We should also keep in mind that, although not stated in this paragraph, there are matters that the UN and its Security Council could directly intervene and these are explained in Chapter VII as matters of ‘international security and peace.’

The other area pertains to the “matters which are essentially within the domestic jurisdiction.” The word ‘essentially’ is usually emphasised by the experts. There is a considerable agreement that human rights are not ‘essentially within the domestic jurisdiction.’ This means UN could interfere at least in grave human rights matters.

Yet in my present view even the UN should refrain from intervening, as much as possible, in human rights issues, if there is no consent, in countries directly although it perhaps has the mandate to do so. Instead the UN should utilize the ‘other manners’ or other means in influencing the countries under its scrutiny. This is exactly what is happening today and Sri Lanka should not be agitated by the situation.

Therefore my appeal for you is to cooperate instead of resisting or objecting to the UN, keeping in mind the best interest of the people in the country irrespective of ethnicity, religion, political affiliation or any other distinction. Sri Lanka should have a better understanding of the United Nations, its objectives and particularly on human rights.

There were many other pronouncements in relation to the ethnic issue, its settlement and reconciliation in your speech which go contrary to the principles of human rights and best interests of the country and the people. However, I refrain from commenting on them hoping that even at this last stage before the government delegation going before the UN Human Rights Council in Geneva that you might moderate your stance and change course considering the best interests of the country and the people.

Yours sincerely,

UK TO SUPPORT US RESOLUTION AGAINST SRI LANKA

February 6, 2013 
British Foreign and Commonwealth Office Minister for South Asia Alistair Burt has confirmed that the British government will support a United States sponsored resolution on Sri Lanka at United Nations Human Rights Council session in Geneva later next month, foreign media reported.

Responding to questions on a solution to the ethnic issue Burt said UK will continue to urge the Sri Lankan Government and the major Tamil party, Tamil National Alliance to make serious progress towards a political settlement in the country.

US has recently announced bringing a procedural resolution against Sri Lanka’s human rights record and non-implementation of its own Lessons Learnt and Reconciliation Commission Report.

Both the US and Sri Lanka have claimed that it expects India to vote in their favour on the issue.

JVP says Matale mass grave has remains of 200 torture victims

... blames govt. for harboruing killers,offers to face probe into its own killings

February 5, 2013, 9:49 pm 

by Dasun Edirisinghe

 The JVP yesterday charged that those responsible for the Matale killings during 1987-89 period, directly or indirectly, were now holding high ranking posts in President Mahinda Rajapaksa’s government.

Addressing a media conference at the party head office, in Pelawatte yesterday, JVP parliamentary group leader Anura Kumara Dissanayake said that they could not expect from the government justice for the victims buried in the Matale mass grave, which contained 140 skulls as well as skeletal remains.

"Experts involved in the excavation believe there are remains of at least 200 people" MP Dissanayake said, adding that it was the largest mass grave in Sri Lanka’s history and it belonged to 1987-89 period, according to experts.

The experts engaged in probing the Matale mass grave had now confirmed that the victims had been that victims were killed after being tortured, Dissanayake said.

According to them the deaths were not due to natural causes. The heads of some bodies had been severed, he said, adding that hands and legs had also been severed.

"It is clearly evident that body parts were severed," Dissanayake said.

Some people try to dismiss the find claiming that the remains belong to the people who died in an epidemic. If so their deaths should have been recorded in courts and hospitals before burial, Dissanayake said.

The JVP MP said that the then UNP government sponsored death squads were responsible for killing 60,000 JVP members after torturing them.

The then government ran torture chambers countrywide and a massive one at Matale as well as at Koskele in Kurunegala, Eliyakanda in Matara, Suriyakanda in Embilipitiya and Batalanda in Kelaniya, he said.

The MP accused most of the then ministers of having run mini torture chambers in their residences in the Galle, Matara, Puttalam and Gampaha districts during the 1987-89 period.

Dissanayake said that although the then UNP government killed lawyer Wijedasa Liyanarachchi, he had been betrayed to the authorities by a person who was now a top man in the present government. "Not only that, the person who led then UNP government’s killing squad, called PRRA between 1987 and 1989, is now a minister in the Rajapaksa government."

"That is the reason why we say that those responsible for the 1987 – 89 killings, directly or indirectly, are now with the Rajapaksa government," Dissanayake said.

MP Dissanayake said that people in the Wilgamuwa and Rattota areas were ready to give evidence regarding torture chambers in the Matale area.

The JVP also demanded a comprehensive probe into the Matale mass grave and that those responsible for the mass killings be brought to justice, even at this late stage.

Answering a query by The Island, what the JVP had got to say about the many killings carried out by it in the late 1980s, Dissanayake said his party was ready to face any inquiry for the killings during the 1987 – 89 period.

Senior analysts involved in the process of exhuming the remains from the mass grave confirmed the allegations brought up by the JVPers and said that the bones carried the tell tale marks of torture.

One senior analyst told The Island, on condition of anonymity, that the coin found from the grave had been introduced into it by some police personnel with the intention of misleading the investigators. The coin had been minted in 1969 and those who introduced it to the grave wanted to tamper with evidence hoping that the date of killings would be dated to 1971 period but that efforts would not serve the purpose as the legal experts involved in the investigations had evidence that the police had introduced the coin, he said.

Open Letter To IGP On Delay To Act In The Case Of Rape

By Bijo Francis -February 6, 2013

Bijo Francis

February 6, 2013

Mr. N.K. Illangakoon

Inspector General of Police

Government of Sri Lanka

Police Head Quarters

Colombo

SRI LANKA

Fx: +94 11 440440 / 327877

Ref: AHRC – STM – 031-2013

Dear Sir,

Re: No action regarding the complaint of rape against the chief monk of Shanti Viharaya, Kalaniya

I refer to my letter dated February 1, 2013 regarding the rape of a 43-year-old woman by the chef monk of the Shanti Viharaya in Kalaniya.

The victim complains that she has been taken to the police station at Peliyagoda, to the Shanti Viharaya and several other places. However, so far, no action has been taken to arrest the suspect monk or to proceed with the case. The suspect feels that there is an attempt to hush up the case and to leave the monk free. According to the victim she has overheard the police officers at the Peliyagoda Police Station saying that there have been other complaints against the same suspect monk but no action had been taken as he had on other occasions, assisted the police.

The victim also complains that her treatment at the police station shows extreme insensitivity towards a woman who has been subjected to such a devastating and emotionally and psychologically disturbing experience as rape. She says that the chief investigating police officer and even some women police officers who were asked to participate while she was interrogated made jokes at her expense and was using the occasion for their entertainment.

On one occasion the questioning took place over a period of six hours. However, nothing had been written down. She was asked to attend another day and then the same questions were put to her by a woman police officer. The narrating of a rape experience is a traumatising event for a woman and today in many countries police officer is specially trained to deal with such victims with great care and also not act in a manner to re-traumatise the victim. It appears that none of the officers who have dealt with this case have shown any influence such training. In fact, her impression of their behaviour is that most of the time they acted in a vulgar manner.

This incident has happened on January 4, 2013. She has made a complaint in the early morning of the next day. She was warded at the Ragama Hospital for one week and examined by a Judicial Medical Officer. The JMO provided a certificate confirming the examination and also gave the reference to her file which she has already submitted to the police. She has been taken to the scene of the crime and was able to point out all the material evidence which collaborate her version of the events. The police have also taken her blood stained clothes. With all the evidence available the suspect has not been arrested, questioned and produced before a court. Any other suspect would have been arrested with much less evidence and produced in court. Now the police also have 48 hours of investigation however, none of these powers have been utilised to enforce the law.

Meanwhile the police have also tried to create the impression that the victim is not of sound mind. The police officers have gone to neighbourhood houses to inquire about her and also called her former husband for recording a statement. The questions put, suggest that they were trying to make out the case that she is not of sound mind with the view to undermine the credibility of her statement.

You will have seen that in the Sunday Times there was a report that there are five reported cases of rape reported everyday in Sri Lanka. The deterrence of such a crime depends on the capacity and the seriousness with which the cases are investigated and prosecuted. This incident demonstrates that such kind of seriousness or capacity is not demonstrated by the officers who deal with these cases.

We urge that urgent intervention be made to ensure justice for this case and at the same time, as Inspector General of Police make a serious review of the manner in which the police department deals with rape cases. Perhaps as is done in some countries taking advice from psychologists on dealing with rape cases and providing some psychological training for your officers would help in dealing with the rape epidemic that the country is faced with. Neighbouring countries like India after some recent unfortunate incidents have even brought about new legislation to deal with rape cases in a more serious manner. The Sri Lankan people surely deserve no less.

Thank you.

Yours faithfully,

Bijo Francis

Interim Executive Director

Asian Human Rights Commission

Why India should finally stand up?

UNHRC resolution on Sri Lanka

| by G Pramod Kumar

( February 6, 2013, New Delhi, Sri Lanka Guardian) If India has been constrained to side with Sri Lanka on the ethnic Tamil issue as well as in blocking international pressure for its alleged war crimes because of geopolitical weakness, it can seize an upcoming opportunity: the 22nd UN Human Rights Council (UNHRC) session to be held in March.

Dissatisfied with Sri Lanka’s inability to comply with international demands – even after a resolution at the UNHRC last year – the US is planning a “procedural resolution” against the country. In spirit and intent, it will be a near-repeat of the last resolution, which wanted Sri Lanka to implement its own recommendations on the 2009 war excesses and punish the guilty.

Reuters quoted visiting Deputy Assistant Secretary of State James Moore in Colombo as saying, “The US and the other 23 members of the UNHRC who voted for that resolution in 2012 believe that the government of Sri Lanka needs to fulfill its commitments made to its own people.”

Following the war against the LTTE, in which about 40,000 Tamil civilians were allegedly killed and scores of others executed, Sri Lanka had set up an expert group called the LLRC (Lessons Learned and Reconciliation Commission) to investigate alleged excesses and recommend action. However weak its recommendations were, Sri Lanka dragged its feet in implementing them.

Tangled in bureaucratic procedures that Sri Lanka goes at length to explain as the process of their implementation, the LLRC recommendations have been gathering dust for over two years now.

India’s role at the UNHRC in March last, where the US and its allies pushed for the anti-Sri Lanka resolution, was dubious at best. It voted supporting the resolution at the 11th hour, but spoiled its efficacy by watering it down. Before and after the resolution, the country appeared to be vulnerable to the deception of the island nation, which even did some hostile posturing through its proxies.

It’s the geopolitical quadrangle involving China and Pakistan that is making India’s knees weak when it comes to its island neighbour. The wily Sri Lankan regime constantly dangles this geopolitical quadrangle, forcing India to behave like an insecure lover. In the process, China has reportedly made considerable economic and strategic gains in the country, which has even prompted the opposition UNP to advise caution.

“Sri Lanka has gone out on a limb to offer projects to China since the inception of this year,” newspaper Nation quoted UNP member of parliament and economist Dr Harsha de Silva. “Sri Lanka has sidelined India for unknown reasons and this shortsightedness could prove to be harmful in the long term considering that the UNHRC summit is months away.”

Besides the Hambantota port and international airport, China has reportedly bagged another highway project and investments in other sectors such as agriculture.

Notwithstanding intense international pressure and the last UNHRC resolution, Sri Lanka has grown even more brazen in handling dissent, and its regime has become more undemocratic and intolerant to criticism. The latest in its rising defiance was the impeachment of the Supreme Court chief justice Shirani Bandaranayake, even as civil rights groups at home and the international community stridently asked the government to stop this undemocratic process.

In a gross violation of the separation of powers, which is an inalienable characteristic of a democracy, the Mahinda Rajapakse regime removed the chief justice because she exercised her judicial right to question the government. Justice Shirani had asked the government not to take back the powers of the provinces without the Court’s approval.

In a funny procedure, that befitted the conduct of a banana republic, Rajapakse then used his massive parliamentary strength to send her home, and appointed a pliable ally as the next chief justice. With this, the vital separation of powers between the judiciary and the executive has in effect vanished in Sri Lanka, letting the President virtually handle both. He is now the country’s first democratically elected autocrat.

The impeachment has sent a clear signal to the judiciary to fall in line or get out. In comparison, even a crumbling Pakistan has a better judiciary.

As Firstpost had noted, Justice Shirani’s impeachment was India’s foreign policy failure, because with her removal Sri Lanka has ensured that its aim not to devolve powers to the Tamil provinces is now unopposed. This was against the promise given to India, with regards to the 13th amendment of the Sri Lankan constitution. (The 13th amendment sets up the Provincial councils and outlines some devolution of power)

India has always pacified Tamil groups in the country citing 13th amendment, promise of more inclusive politics and the reported rehabilitation efforts. The impeachment exposed Sri Lanka’s double standards on the issue and betrayed its treacherous designs with India.

The Sri Lankan President’s address on the 65th independence day, where he ruled out autonomy for Tamils and promised only equal rights, confirmed that India has been cheated out of the game. This was against what has been historically agreed with India.

Now, as many independent observers and rights groups have warned time and again, the country has completely gone back on its promise. It may be easily concluded that the question of Tamil autonomy is now more or less a closed chapter; it’s not even a pipe-dream.

Available information shows that the ethnically and culturally distinctive (Tamil) north and eastern areas of the country are more homogenised and militarised now. The regime would want to culturally unify the distinctively Tamil areas, which will prove to be detrimental to the interests of the Tamils as the Sinhala language policy had done a few decades ago.

India has other reasons to get out of its geopolitical weak spot.

There is considerable political protest brewing in Tamil Nadu. President Rajapakse is scheduled to visit India, ostensibly on pilgrimage to Bodh Gaya in Bihar, and Tirupati in Andhra Pradesh, and the Tamil groups are planning black-flag protests.

At a DMK-led Tamil Eelam Supporters Organisation (TESO) meeting on Sunday in Chennai, Karunanidhi asked the union government not to encourage Rajapakse in India. He said Rajapakse was a an enemy of humanity. He also wanted the centre to facilitate a resolution at the upcoming UNHRC session asking for a referendum in Sri Lanka.

The US resolution will be yet another opportunity for India to call Sri Lanka’s bluff and take action on its blatant dismissal of the demands of human rights groups and international community. Over the years, it has perfected the art of lying, dodging and ganging up with countries that have scant respect for human rights and democracy to thumb its nose at civility. India has been a willing victim.

Even now, Sri Lanka is certain that India will side with it. “Our position is that India is our greatest friend and closest neighbor and they have been extremely supportive in many issues and they have been a friend indeed. So, we believe that stand,” media minister Keheliya Rambukwella has reportedly said.

It’s time India played back the geopolitical card.

Case Against Mohan Pieris: A Tragic Day For Justice

By Mudliyar -February 5, 2013 

Those who attended Court No 403 on 1^st February 2013 and witnessed the Counsel for the Petitioner single-handedly fighting the case (FR/536/2010), filed against Mohan Peiris, would agree that the Counsel was under tremendous pressure by the obviously biased Judges and the AG’s Department, the integrity of which is at stake.  It was obvious that there was a concerted effort to stop the case from proceeding any further, challenging the dishonesty and gross misconduct of Mohan Peiris as well as exposing the lawlessness prevails at the AG’s Department. The Counsel for the Petitioner was forced to attend the Court under threats to his life, that according to media, he had reported to the Police.

By Mudliyar -

Those who attended Court No 403 on 1^st February 2013 and witnessed the Counsel for the Petitioner single-handedly fighting the case (FR/536/2010), filed against Mohan Peiris, would agree that the Counsel was under tremendous pressure by the obviously biased Judges and the AG’s Department, the integrity of which is at stake.  It was obvious that there was a concerted effort to stop the case from proceeding any further, challenging the dishonesty and gross misconduct of Mohan Peiris as well as exposing the lawlessness prevails at the AG’s Department. The Counsel for the Petitioner was forced to attend the Court under threats to his life, that according to media, he had reported to the Police.

Mohan Pieris

It was indeed depressing to witness the Rule of Law rapidly eroding under the new head of the Judiciary, Mohan Peiris, the de facto CJ, and the accuse in the case, where the remaining Judges have meekly surrendered their moral integrity. From the very beginning, the Petitioner was  completely denied a fair hearing, whilst serious allegations were being leveled against the Petitioner that he was abusing the legal process to tarnish the image of Mohan Peiris. The Counsel was strictly warned not to refer to Mohan Peiris by name, despite him being charged in his personal capacity in the case. It was obvious to all those present at the court house that the Petitioner was not only denied his right to a fair trial but a stern message was sent out to all citizens who challenges their right violations to expect deterrent punishments with order granted in favor of Respondents, as in this case, when powerful allies of the government are the accused. Probably, this may be the first time in a fundamental rights case where the Petitioner was made to pay cost for the Respondents. Read More

Expose in parliament what was discussed between Manmohan Singh and Pieris? UNP urge

Recently Minister Prof.G.L.Peiris visited India and had a discussion with Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh. What were the agreements made, on the recent discussions held in India United National Party urged the government to inform Parliament and the country about the matters discussed at the meeting.  

It was learnt they had discussed the implementation of the 13 Amendment and the government had requested more time saying there were various arguments regarding the matter among the government allies and more time was needed to arrive at a compromise

United National Party General Secretary and parliament member Tissa Attanayake said, in the aim of defeating the international pressure emerging against it at the Geneva sessions, this is one of government’s effort.

A media briefing was held yesterday at the opposition party leader's official residence and he made these statements.

In year 2011, the two country External Affairs Ministers jointly made a statement, and concerning this if discussions had been done in this meeting, why government kept mum of the proceedings? He said not only this; the government has discarded the agreements made by the two countries.

Recently External Affairs Minister Prof.G.L.Peiris was on a visit to India and had discussions with Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh.

The main opposition UNP today urged the government to reveal the outcome of the recent meeting between External Affairs Minister G.L. Peiris and the Indian Premier. But government did not so far officially reveal in which basis the matters were discussed.

UNP General Secretary Tissa Attanayake made a statement at the news conference in Colombo said, that the government kept mum on the recent discussions held in India and urged the government to inform Parliament and the country about the matters discussed at the meeting.

However External Affairs Minister said that the discussion was held regarding the implementation of the 13th Amendment and economic and social development. But the government has not made an official statement about the meeting as yet.”

At an earlier instant too Indian Prime Minister, Defense Ministry Advisor and External Affairs Minister were met by government representatives and had discussions.

In year 2011, Indian former External Affairs Minister S.M.Krishna visited Sri Lanka, published a joint statement along with Sri Lanka's External Affairs Minister Prof.G.L.Peiris on 17^th of May.

The report established to find a settlement to the Tamils ethnic crisis devolution powers on the basis of 13th amendment, implementation of Reconciliation Commission's recommendation, to protect national peace, safe guard human rights, expediting resettlement, strengthening the north development and economy bilateral agreements

Between the two countries, Sri Lanka will take constructive measures was stated. 

Not only this, but the two countries made agreements. If concerning this, Minister G.L.Peiris had discussed with Indian Prime Minister, why government is not revealing the Indo - Sri Lanka talks. It can expose in parliament.

In the aim to establish ethnic reconciliation in the country, and to strengthen the relationship between India and Sri Lanka, the agreements made by two countries, government should implement, but government has discarded these.

13th amendment is a foundation for the racial crisis settlement and concerning this government had requested more time saying there were various arguments regarding the matter among the government allies and more time was needed to arrive at a compromise, was the request made by External Affairs Minister Peiris from Indian Prime Minister.

Postponing in the settlement issue of ethnic crisis by the government is an act of breach bilateral agreements.

To defeat the challenges and the crisis appear against Sri Lanka at the UN human rights council sessions held in Geneva, Sri Lanka government has requested more time to completely implement the 13th amendment from India.

 Minister Peiris to drink a cup of tea has exhausted peoples funds, and it is not an essentiality to visit India.

What was the discussions Minister Peiris had with Indian Prime Minister and what are the agreement made, should  be publicly notified to the people of this country which is the responsibility of the government, hence this should be revealed at the parliament was stated by him.

Wednesday , 06 February 2013