Counting Every Casualty Of Sri Lankan Civil War

By Krishna Kalaichelvan -February 26, 2013 

Dr Krishna Kalaichelvan

At first, the announcement of a “scientifically designed census” that will be conducted by the Department of Census and Statistics of Sri Lanka on “deaths/ injuries to persons and property damages during the period of the conflict as recommended by the Lessons Learnt and Reconciliation Commission (LLRC)”, was a pleasant surprise to me, then I am reminded of #HRC22 aka UN Human Rights Council regular session 22, an attempt to ease the US led pressure in Geneva. Still, I hope this will be a genuine attempt to count the civilian deaths and injuries (irrespective of ethnic and religious identities) during the conflict period in Sri Lanka.

According to this press release, a “steering committee” has been appointed to work under the secretary to Ministry of Public Administration and Home Affairs and the committee has devised a “centralized system of data collection at the national level integrating all information with regard to missing persons”.

There are few ‘issues’ I would like to raise regarding this census;

Though I recognize that the active conflict period can be defined as 1983 -2009, but it is important to record the deaths and injuries that happened during many of the anti-Tamil riots and pogroms since 1950s.

And it was mentioned in that press release that this project is part of the National Plan of Action for the implementation of the LLRC recommendations, hence confines to Sinhala-Tamil ethnic conflict only. It is equally important to carry out a similar “professionally designed house hold survey” to count the deaths and injuries happened during the two JVP insurrections in the south. Despite the work of few Presidential Commissions, there are no detailed recordings of deaths and disappearances; the recent discovery of mass grave in Matale proves again that the chapters on two JVP insurgencies are yet to be closed.   

In terms of methodology, even though there is no shortage of competent statisticians and epidemiologists in Sri Lanka, there are non-political technological resources available internationally for Sri Lankan practitioners to seek in order to conduct this complex study. Especially a technical level interaction with organizations like the UK based Oxford Research Group is possible without the accusation of foreign interference. Therefore the Sri Lankan practitioners will enormously benefit by familiarising the experiences of their international colleagues’ in managing complex studies such as ‘Iraq Body Count’ and ‘The Bosnian Book of Dead’.

Because of thirty years of war and large-scale emigration, a territorial based census will not be an adequate-enough methodological approach in Sri Lankan context. Thus nearly a million strong Tamil diaspora must be included into the study population. In current political context it is unthinkable that the government or the Tamil diaspora will cooperate with each other on this issue. If we really wanted to count every civilian casualty that occurred during the ethnic conflict, it is possible only by adopting a non-territorial methodological approach, a transnational virtual field study. Such a project will be a logistical nightmare and needs huge resource input. That is why I am permanently-skeptic about any grandiose pronouncements of ‘counting’ the war dead in Sri Lanka.

I am hopeful that the Department of Census and Statistics of Sri Lanka will do a far better job than Frances Harrison’s claim of ‘counting’ the war dead during the last Vanni war.

I am not pretending that this study has no political implications; in fact if it is ‘properly done’, the outcome may be politically embarrassing for the incumbent and past Sri Lankan governments, especially when comparing with the figures provided by the infamous ‘Lanka Puvath’ in the past. But a genuine reconciliation process can take place in Sri Lanka only when there have robust measures been taken to address the issues of accountability and justice. Therefore the Sri Lankan practitioners have a huge moral and ethical responsibility in conducting this study in a professional manner without giving into political prejudices.

*Krishna Kalaichelvan (anapayan) is a UK based commentator on Sri Lankan and South-Asian politics, global health and international security, he is a medical doctor by training. His articles can be found at anapayan.wordpress.com

CANADA MUST PUSH FOR STRONG RESOLUTION ON SRI LANKA AT UN HUMAN RIGHTS COUNCIL OTTAWA

Craig Scott -NDP 

New Democrat Foreign Affairs critic Paul Dewar is calling on the Government of Canada to take leadership at United Nations Human Rights Council and push for a strong resolution for accountability in Sri Lanka.

“The international community as a whole failed to prevent atrocities and widespread violations of human rights against Tamil civilians in Sri Lanka,” said Dewar. “The new session of the United Nations Human Rights Council offers us a crucial opportunity to take steps toward restoring justice. Canada must push for a strong resolution that acts upon the recommendations of the UN Panel of Experts on Accountability in Sri Lanka.”

The UN Panel of Experts Report revealed that “there are credible allegations, which if proven, indicate that a wide range of serious violations of international humanitarian and human rights law were committed both by the government of Sri Lanka and the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelan (LTTE), some of which amount to war crimes and crimes against humanity.” It recommended that those responsible be prosecuted and urged the UN to launch an immediate and independent investigation.

In 2009, the Sri Lankan military cornered hundreds of thousands of Tamil civilians in a small piece of land along with LTTE fighters. The area was shelled indiscriminately with the stated goal of defeating the insurgents. In the process, thousands of civilians were killed as the international community turned a blind eye. The Government of Sri Lanka has rejected global calls for accountability. Worse still, it has been actively promoting its model abroad to other countries facing domestic insurgencies.

“Despite repeated assurances from the Government of Sri Lanka, judicial independence and respect for human rights took another step backwards when the Sri Lankan Chief Justice Shirani Bandaranayake faced a politically-motivated impeachment,” said Dewar. “Failure to hold the Sri Lankan government to account sends a troubling message to other countries facing domestic insurgencies – that the international community is willing to see similar atrocities repeated elsewhere with full impunity.”

“New Democrats stand in solidarity with people of conscience around the world in calling on the Sri Lankan government to demonstrate a commitment to honour and uphold values of good governance and respect for human rights,” said Dewar. “Canada must act responsibility on the global stage and work with other countries to pass a meaningful and strong resolution at the Human Rights Council on this issue.”

-30-      For more information, please contact:

Amneet Singh, Outreach Officer, 613-296-0149 or Amneet.Singh@parl.gc.ca

Impeaching CJ Shirani B, CJ Mohan P, War Crimes And Reconciliation

By Rajiva Wijesinha -February 26, 2013 

Prof Rajiva Wijesinha

How Continuing Distrust Stands In The Way Of Reconciliation

I was told recently by a diplomat that, amongst the worries in connection with the appointment of Mohan Pieris as Chief Justice, was the feeling that he had been put there to subvert any judicial process that might be implemented with regard to War Crimes. This struck me as ridiculous.

But it was also indicative of the deep distrust and lack of logic that bedevil our relations with the world. It is based on an obsession with War Crimes that is a creation of two equally pernicious initiatives. The first is the determination of the LTTE rump to avenge the destruction of their hero and the terrorist separatist agenda. The second is the cynical efforts of some Western politicians to use the charge to exert pressure on us.

As the LLRC report indicates, and all actual evidence suggests, if there were abuses, they were committed by individuals, and should and would be dealt with by military courts. Though it is claimed that we have delayed unduly in this regard, that is absurd, and those who complain know this perfectly well, given how long it has taken the British and the Americans to deal with abuses by their personnel. Of course our failure to act with regard to what happened in Trincomalee is another question, and our delay there is unacceptable, but that had nothing to do with the war, and did not involve the military.

Where we are at fault is in not publicizing what we are doing. We should learn from what the Americans and the British did, and perhaps even emulate them in acquitting everyone except one suitable scapegoat – and the Americans avoided doing even that in the celebrated case of the team that cut off the thumbs of their victims.

I do not however see this as hypocrisy. In the first place, securing convictions is difficult when standards of proof are high, as criminal cases demand. Secondly, the point is to make it clear that abuses are unacceptable, so as to limit their occurrence.

For all that what we need is army action, with no intervention by the Supreme Court. The notion therefore that Mohan Pieris was made Chief Justice to subvert action in the Courts is totally illogical. It is also misplaced in that there seem clear indications that others were considered for the post, and the previous Attorney General, who is reported to have refused the job, was the Chairman of the LLRC which identified abuses they thought required further inquiry.

But this type of illogicality is not confined to foreigners. One argument I have heard for the determination toimpeach the Chief Justice is that she was part of an international conspiracy to subvert the developmental projects of the Sri Lankan government, and indeed the government itself.

That too is an absurd notion. While clearly elements in government were not pleased when judgment was initially delivered on the Divineguma Bill, it has since been recognized that the strictures made were perfectly reasonable, and the Court made it clear that the Bill could be passed following procedural proprieties, and / or with modifications, and /or with a two thirds majority. Indeed some Cabinet Ministers have noted that the insistence on greater Cabinet responsibility was a boon.

Conversely, it should also be recognized that the recalcitrance of the Chief Justice, as manifested not just in her refusal to attend a meeting with the President, but in the extravagant statement issued by the Judicial Services Commission, followed developments that sufficiently explain her attitude without assuming international interventions. One view is that the charges against her husband upset her. The more generous view is that the incidents in Mannar, with allegations of improper behavior by a politician and a spate of confrontational demonstrations, made her unduly conscious of the status of the judiciary.

But unfortunately we all prefer to think of conspiracies rather than look at facts rationally and make allowances for frail human nature. So we have yet another example of the corrosive distrust that bedevils our efforts to move forward.

Rajapaksa Ignores Human Rights, says UN

Tuesday, 26 February 2013 

Melbourne, Tuesday --The UN Human Rights High Commissioner, Navi Pillay, says Sri Lanka has broken its promise to improve human rights in the island nation. Pillay said the Rajapaksa regime had failed to investigate atrocities, as it promised the UN a year ago, and that opposition leaders were still being killed or abducted.

In an interview with the Sri Lankan Sunday Times, Pillay said: “The Government has made little progress in pursuing true accountability and reconciliation measures... “...There is a long history of national inquiries in Sri Lanka that have led nowhere but to impunity.... There has to be justice, if there is to be lasting peace.”

Pillay has also issued a stern warning to the Sri Lankan Government not to repeat last year’s intimidation and threats against human rights defenders at next week’s UN Human Rights Council meeting to examine Sri Lanka’s progress on human rights and post-war reconciliation with Tamils.

The BBC reported last March that the Minister for Public Relations, Mervyn Silva, threatened to “break the limbs” of certain journalists and human rights workers whom he called “traitors.”

His comments came a day after the UNHRC passed a resolution that contained criticism of the country’s human rights record, as well as a call to initiate an independent investigation into allegations against the Sri Lankan military of war crimes and crimes against humanity in the final days of the civil war in 2009.

Pillay said the Sri Lankan Government had been reprimanded by the UNHRC president for its behaviour at the 2012 session. She said she had written to the Sri Lankan Foreign Minister to protest that some of the threats against various groups were carried on his own website.

Next Monday the UN Human Rights Council will begin debating the second US resolution on Sri Lanka in 12 months. It is expected to call on Sri Lanka to honour its promise to the UN last year to initiate the independent war crimes investigation and to:

• Credibly investigate widespread allegations of extra-judicial killings and enforced disappearances.

• Demilitarize the north of Sri Lanka and re-evaluate detention policies.

• Implement impartial land dispute resolution mechanisms.

• Protect the right of freedom of expression for all and enact rule of law reforms.

Campaign for Tamil Justice spokesperson, Trevor Grant, said the first US resolution, which was supported by Australia, the UK, Canada and India, among others, was so weak that it encouraged Sri Lanka to continue its program of ethnic-cleansing against the Tamils.

“It was the equivalent of a wink and nod to Sri Lanka to carry on persecuting Tamils. A draft of the second one looks about the same,” Grant said. “Until the UN faces the reality on the ground in Sri Lanka, that a genocide is taking place and it needs to act strongly, then nothing much will change.”

The International Crisis Group and Human Rights Watch have recently issued scathing reports on the Sri Lankan Government’s abuse of human rights. They have called on the countries meeting at the UNHRC next week to implement much stronger action this time.

A letter signed by 133 Roman Catholic, Anglican and Methodist pastors and nuns in Sri Lanka has asked the UNHRC to set up an independent war crimes’ investigation, claiming the Government does not have the political will to do it.

At least 40,000 Tamil civilians died after being herded into supposed “safe zones” in May, 2009. A 2011 UN report

said there were credible allegations that these people were then shelled and bombed by the Sri Lankan military. The report said that there was evidence that the Tamil Tigers may have committed war crimes.

Pillay explained why she believed it was important for the independent investigation to go ahead. “Because tens of thousands of civilians were reportedly killed. Because there are very credible allegations and some strong pictorial evidence and witness accounts indicating that war crimes and other serious international crimes...took place on a large scale,” she said.

“There is a long history of national inquiries in Sri Lanka that have led nowhere but to impunity. This makes such an international investigation essential. Crimes like these cannot simply be ignored or pushed aside. There has to be justice, if there is to be lasting peace.”

In a speech to the London School of Economics recently, Pillay drew the comparison between UN reports on Sri Lanka and Rwanda, where a Government-orchestrated genocide against the minority Tutsu population in 1994 saw almost one million people die while the international community did virtually nothing.

The Petrie report on Sri Lanka was an admission that the UN had made a grave error by leaving the war zones towards the end of the war in 2009. It was a decision that cost the lives of thousands of innocent Tamils as the Sri Lankan military ruthlessly attacked civilians in what became known as the “war without witness.”

“Rwanda’s lessons were not implemented in Sri Lanka,” Pillay said. Campaign for Tamil Justice calls upon the UNHRC to:

• Immediately take the strongest action required to stop the persecution and the ethnic cleansing of Tamils in Sri Lanka by the Government. This includes Government-sponsored land theft, destruction of Tamil homes and transplanting of Sinhalese citizens into traditional Tamil regions, demolition of cultural icons such as Tamil shrines, and the massive military presence used to control of the daily lives of Tamils in the northern and eastern regions.

• Initiate immediately an independent international investigation into allegations by a UN panel of Sri Lankan military war crimes and crimes against humanity towards the end of the war.

• Stop the murder, torture, jailings, beatings and disappearances of Tamils and fully support the prosecution of those responsible.

• Demand an end to the murders and disappearances of Sri Lankan journalists. Demand full investigation and prosecution of those responsible for these crimes.

• Demand a sustainable solution to Tamil grievances. This includes giving Tamils political autonomy and empowering them by allowing self-determination in traditional Tamil regions.

For further information contact Campaign for Tamil Justice:

Trevor Grant 0400 597 351; Seran Sribalan O452 224 205.

Bloody secrets

Feb 26th 2013,
• Latest Banyan

NEARLY four years after its civil war ended, Sri Lanka is far from at peace over its recent history. Despite denials by the country’s leaders, notably its powerful defence secretary, Gotabaya Rajapaksa, that Sri Lanka’s army committed war crimes in the final weeks of fighting, in 2009, troubling new evidence keeps on appearing.

In March the United Nations' human-rights council is expected to renew an American-led resolution calling on Sri Lanka’s government to report on its efforts to investigate war crimes, and on relations with Tamils in the country. India and European Union countries look set to back the resolution, as they did with the original a year ago.

In preparation, activists and journalists have been providing disturbing new proof that forces under Mr Rajapaksa (and so also under the control of his brother, Mahinda, the president), committed violent crimes with impunity. Worse, convincing evidence is also appearing that state-security forces have continued to torture, rape and otherwise violently abuse Tamils, even after the war.

A British television broadcaster, Channel 4, previously showed images of Sri Lankan soldiers executing several naked, presumably Tamil, prisoners. These were recorded at the end of the war, in 2009. Asked by your correspondent a year ago about the images, Sri Lanka’s defence secretary called them “fake”, angrily denied ever having ordered a civilian or a prisoner killed, and (unprompted) said his forces had not committed “genocide”.

By contrast Tamil political leaders suggested 10,000 Tamils had been killed in the closing stages of the war, and that over 1,000 survivors remained missing. They spoke of mass graves hidden in the north of Sri Lanka and of the murder of many civilians.

This month, ahead of the UN vote, Channel 4 broadcast a new documentary showing a 12-year-old, Balachandran Prabhakaran, the son of the feared Tamil rebel leader, Velupillai Prabhakaran, in the custody of Sri Lankan forces at the end of the war. In the first pictures he looks nervous, but is seen eating while under guard. A subsequent photo shows his bullet-ridden corpse.

The pictures appear to be war trophies snapped with phones by Sri Lankan soldiers themselves. The photos strongly suggest the child was murdered. It is reasonable to ask whether the order to do so would have come from high in the military, or political, hierarchy. The film may be broadcast at the UN meeting in Geneva, though Sri Lanka’s government is trying to block it.

Perhaps equally disturbing is evidence of the Rajapaksas’ authoritarian rule getting entrenched, as is argued in a new report by the International Crisis Group. And the violent crimes continue. A new report by Human Rights Watch, an activist group, released on February 26th, publishes testimony from victims, doctors and others, who describe how Sri Lanka’s security forces—its army, police, intelligence agents—use arbitrary detention, violence, torture and rape against Tamil suspects.

It documents 75 cases—including 31 from 2010 to late last year—of Tamil men and women (including two who had been forcibly deported from Britain to Sri Lanka) who were detained, violently interrogated, threatened with execution, raped, burned with cigarettes, tortured and forced to sign confessions of supporting the former rebel army. Many were snatched by plainclothes figures travelling in white vans, either in the capital, Colombo, or in northern Sri Lanka. It makes for harrowing, convincing reading. The group says it has evidence such practices have continued in the past few months.

Sri Lanka’s official response is angry denial. A version of the UN resolution is doing the rounds in Colombo. The Rajapaksa government may fail to block it, and prefers to talk up its diplomatic ties with China. In any case, foreign criticism has limited impact: domestic critics among the press, activist groups, religious bodies and unions look ever more cowed; the parliamentary opposition is all but silent. Among the Sinhalese majority, the Rajapaksas remain popular for winning the war and delivering strong economic growth. They portray foreign criticism as an international conspiracy to smear Sri Lanka’s reputation.

Thus, one can expect no decisive change. Once the UN has had its vote, the next clash is likely to concern a summit of Commonwealth leaders in November, which is due to be held in Colombo. Various countries, perhaps including India, where local Tamil political parties can influence national policy, may demand better treatment for Sri Lanka’s Tamils (and other domestic opposition) ahead of that meeting. For the Rajapaksa family, the summit is supposed to be a moment of international glory. In the face of clear evidence of atrocities and abuse, that looks ever more tainted.

(Picture credit: Human Rights Watch)

Beneath the Toga of 'Gota’s War' or, where has all the history gone?

26 FEBRUARY 2013

BY VIHANGA PERERA

At a time where Sri Lankan politicians and bureaucrats churn out biographies and supposed autobiographies at a feverish rate, Gota’s War by CA Chandraprema should not be missed. Not only does this add to a rich corpus already featuring Muthu Padmakumara’s Mahinda (in all three languages) and later additions such as Lakshman Hulugalle’s Lakshman, but at the point of release it was also partially seen as a “counter narrative” to work such as 'The Cage' by Gordon Weiss, who was unpatriotic enough to disfigure the government’s post-2009 euphoria with disturbing facts and compelling records of war crimes.

However, expectations aside, Gota’s War by no means undermines the kind of narrative Weiss has come up with – whose submission, much recently, is complemented by works such as Frances Harrison’s Still Counting the Dead – and resigns to be a self-promoting, egoistic statement.

Gota’s War is an analogy for regimental history. It is the document of one-sided traffic flow which, if taken seriously, is detrimental to the discursive reading of “historical” processes. At the crudest as well as at its best, Gota’s War defines a series of political events that left a dent in Sri Lankan affairs over the past three decades as they illuminate the story’s protagonist and the political and ideological positions he represents. Gotabhaya Rajapakshe is the pivot of the narrative construction and from this centralization as a referent point, “what took place” is made relative to whatever “Gota” is. This is a trivialization, but more so, this configures the desired hegemonic principle of government – the current government of Sri Lanka included.

History is blurred or undermined. The youth uprise of 1971 is unpardonably reduced to several fleeting references in three isolated paragraphs. In Chapter 8 there are two surface references to this changing point of post-independence Sri Lankan history, while in Chapter 9 there is one further superficial brush stroke.  Gravity and historical importance of the politically favoured 1983 pogrom, in Gota’s War, is contained to a couple of unelaborated paragraphs (Chapter 17): almost in the guise of a redundancy. The same deletion and de-selection can be seen in references to the 1988 insurrection, which is limited to one chapter. Gordon Weiss’ strength, as I saw it, was how he insists on reading the events that happened in the run up to the LTTE defeat in 2009, with a historically informed platform. In this regard, Weiss’ submission of charges related to war crimes is meditatively lined up with a history of violent suppression which the governments of 1971 and 1988-90, along with their military wings are held responsible for.

Rohitha Munasinghe – ex-JVPer and a political prisoner during 1989-90 at the Eliyakandha torture base in Southern Sri Lanka (who later self-exiled to France) – writes in his From the Underside of the JVP History (‍ජේවීපී ‍ඉතිහාසයේ සැගවුනු බිදක්) of the need for state accountability and of transparent inquest into these regimental quelling under light. The first two chapters of Munasinghe’s book is dedicated to the memory of numerous female cadres of the JVP who were detained, tortured and killed. More so, Munasinghe questions the unrecorded, unreported, statistically unclear suffering of women at the hands of the military during those years of anarchy. How many women were raped under military custody in ’71 and ’88-90? How many were tortured and killed? How many were overall killed or vapourized? These numbers and stories are inconclusive. If the Second JVP Insurrection was a “violation” of the law, who are the “guilty” of this violation? Munasinghe underlines the lack of “due process” – or, even a “process” – in the crushing of the 1988 uprising. In spite of the heavy crackdown, the 1971 insurrection – Munasinghe cedes – at least has a legal procedure and legally prescribed remedies that it resorted to. There were culprits identified and based on their involvement, “sentences” were pronounced. Munasinghe is appalled by the state round up of1988, which is seen as a brutal, extra-legal operation; and by that precedence a violent turning point in our “justice-meting” process.

CA Chandraprema, in Gota’s War, partly apologizes for the use of such violent methodology, while partly making the complex political discourse which lead to the crises the book deals with trivial and simplified. Macmillan, however, does a better job at simplifying David Copperfield, as he still includes that episode where Copperfield is made to wear a board saying, “Beware, he bites”. Such warnings do not come in Chandraprema, who is quick enough to champion the regimental ideology, ahistorically dismissing the JVP as “terrorists”. It is crucial to notice that this designation is retrospective. In the late 1980s, the word “terrorist” was not as fashionable as it is now, and the JVP has rarely been branded as such or denounced in such irrelativist terms in general narratives. But, in the re-writing of history in post-2009 discourses we see the regimental incentive whereby such retrospective redefinitions come in.

Frances Harrison’s title – Still Counting the Dead, used with special reference to the closing stages of the war – in fact, has wider, national implications. From 1971 onwards, Sri Lanka has been infested with unnumbered killings, killings “sans addresses”, disappearances, incarcerations without process, imprisonment without conviction and undocumented assaults, threats and intimidation. Gota’s War, however, is a chronicle that bypasses the confounding and the compelling. It therefore triumphs in being a predictable and essentially selective personalization of a history which cannot be – which shouldn’t be – collapsed in the way it has been done by Chandraprema. Some projects are by all means hard and in its hardness lies the futility. The writing of an unabashed glorification in total disregard for the complexity of (what for the past three decades have been happening in) our geo-political landscape is, in a sense, an achievement. But, that is the story of almost all VIP biographies. From where that comes we already have one too many.

 © In Love With a Whale

---

Vihanga Perera is a poet, prose writer and blogger.

NfR Sri Lanka expresses deep concern on the threats to Sri Lankan human rights lawyer Lakshan Dias and calls for show of solidarity

Tuesday, 26 February 2013 

NfR Sri Lanka, a net work of Sri Lankan journalists and Human Rights Defenders expresses its deep concerns on the reported Threats and intimidations directed at Sri Lankan human rights lawyer Lakshan Dias.

Mr. Lakshan Dias is a well known human rights activist with a long standing experience in promoting and protecting all human rights for all.

A formal complaint was lodged on these threatening developments at the Moratuwa Police (Colombo district) under reference no. CIB-1- 232/442 on 25th Feb. 2013. Updates of further incidents were also communicated to the Police. The number of the motorcycle has also been communicated to the Police. Action taken by the Police is not known.

According to reliable information NfR has received, from 22nd Feb. till today, 26th Feb., there have been men in motor cycles and white van which was loitering around residence of Mr. Dias. White vans are widely used for abductions in Sri Lanka and are cause for fear. Some of these had gone away without speaking to anyone. But others had spoken to his wife and neighbours and asked about him without giving specific details.

One of the persons who had visited the neighbourhood and asked about Lakshan had identified himself as an Inspectors of Police to a neighbour, but later on, the Officer in Charge of the Police station to where Lakshan had lodged a complaint had denied knowing an Inspector by that name.

It is clear that this surveillance, threats and intimidation is due to his human rights work. Other lawyers who were involved in the campaign against impeachment had also faced attempted abduction, shootings and threatening letters.

Mr. Lakshan Dias has appeared for victims of human rights violations in Fundamental Rights applications before the Supreme Court and also represented torture victims, political prisoners before lower courts, visited detainees including political prisoners and those deported back after seeking asylum. He has also engaged in advocacy work nationally and internationally, often speaking out against torture, arbitrary arrest and detention, disappearances, elements in the Prevention of Terrorism Act that contradicts Sri Lanka’s international treaty obligations etc. He has also been involved in advocacy on migrant workers and refugees from other countries coming to Sri Lanka. He has often offered advice and assistance to victims and families of those detained, disappeared. He was an active and leading member of Lawyers for Democracy and the Lawyers Collective, which in late 2012 and early 2013, led the campaigner against the impeachment of the Chief Justice of Sri Lanka. Mr. Dias was an active and leading member of this campaign. He has also been actively engaged with the National Human Rights Commission of Sri Lanka, participating in meetings, sharing information and offering them assistance. He has also been involved in conducting trainings for human rights defenders around Sri Lanka.

In the context of human rights defenders in Sri Lanka have been killed, abducted, assaulted, questioned repeatedly, subjected to surveillance etc NfR urge local and international human rights community to make their concerns known and thereby stand by the civil democratic opposition in the country.

NfR Sri Lanka joins the Sri Lanka based Lawyers Collective in ' reminding the Government of its constitutional duty to protect and respect the citizen's right to dissent and to engage in critical governance activities. The lawyer's struggle was a discharge of their constitutional duty to protect independence of judiciary, which they will continue to do, despite threats; and urges the Government to investigate into these incidents and ensure that the Lawyers, who have stood up against the illegal impeachment of the highest judicial officer of the Country, will not be subjected to any further intimidation.'

Sri Lanka Protests Screening Of Channel 4 Documentary In UN Premises In Geneva

By Sri Lanka Permanent Mission, Geneva – Press release - February 26, 2013 

The Sri Lanka Permanent Mission in Geneva has made formal protest against the screening of the latest Channel 4 documentary film “No Fire Zone: The Killing Fields of Sri Lanka” organized by Human Rights Watch, Amnesty International and FIFDH at the Palais de Nations in Geneva on 1^st March 2013. In a letter addressed to Ambassador Remigiusz Achilles Henczel, President of the Human Rights Council, Sri Lanka’s Permanent Representative to the UN Ravinatha Aryasinha said “Sri Lanka views this film, as well as the timing of its broadcast as part of a cynical, concerted and orchestrated campaign that is strategically driven, and clearly motivated by collateral political considerations”.

Ravinatha Aryasinha

Noting that this is the screening of the third part of a much disputed film series by Channel 4, whose narrative remains discredited, uncorroborated and unsubstantiated, he said such actions would clearly undermine the status of Member States, the work of the Council and leaves it vulnerable to politicization.  It noted that ECOSOC Resolution No. 1996/31 of 25 July 1996 that stipulates the consultative relationship between the United Nations and NGOs provides at Paragraph 57(a) for the suspension and withdrawal of consultative status of NGOs, inter alia, specifically where such an organization either directly or through its affiliates or representatives acting on its behalf, clearly abuses its status by engaging in a pattern of acts contrary to the purposes and principles of the Charter of the UN including unsubstantiated or politically motivated acts against Member States of the UN incompatible with those purposes and principles.

Ambassador Aryasinha who recalled the founding principles of the Human Rights Council of ensuring impartiality and fair play upon which the Council was established and that governs the methods of work of the Council,  observed that it is the paramount duty of the Human Rights Council to ensure that NGOs are not facilitated in perpetrating unsubstantiated and politically motivated acts against countries in the Council, in any manner.

He further observed, that at a time when Sri Lanka is vigorously pursuing a process of reconciliation following three decades of conflict inflicted by LTTE terrorism, it is disturbing to note the efforts on the part of entities based overseas with links to rump elements of the LTTE, as well as certain NGOs with ECOSOC accreditation, in facilitating such programmes containing unsubstantiated material that is morphed and diabolical. This approach not only provides members and observers of the Council with an extremely distorted and unbalanced view of Sri Lanka, but also serves to adversely impact the ongoing comprehensive reconciliation process in Sri Lanka.  It also serves to strengthen the rump elements of the LTTE seeking refuge in the West, who use the propaganda value derived from the screening of such films, as a tool to intensify their fundraising and recruitment activities, thereby undermining the process of reconciliation in Sri Lanka.

Noting that the failure of the Council to deal with such a situation would be perceived as a process that is encouraged by the Council which contravenes the governing principles of the UN Charter and the work of the Council within its stipulated mandate. Ambassador Aryasinha added that the use of one’s premises and the conduct of activities in such premises is a liability to be taken upon by the authority having control over such premises, and that clearly, any explanation that the use of premises once handed over to an organization that seeks to engage in such unwarranted activity cannot be a basis to relieve an institution from its responsibility over such activity. It said such conduct based on administrative convenience is unacceptable.

Ambassador Aryasinha requested the President of the Council to circulate its communication as an official document of the 22^ndsession of the Human Rights Council in all official languages, and also to keep the OHCHR Secretariat informed.

Sri Lanka Government wants to ban the Channel 4 film 'No Fire Zone' at UNHRC

SRI LANKA GOVERNMENT WANTS TO BAN THE CHANNEL 4 FILM ‘NO FIRE ZONE’ AT UNHRC

TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 26, 2013

In a strange move the Government of Sri Lanka send a letter to the President of the UNHRC on the first day of the 22^nd session calling for censorship within the UN premises. In two page letter GoSL said that the GoSL strongly protest the use of the premises of UN for the screening of this film, No Fire Zone produced by the Channel 4. The film is a documentary on the alleged war crimes that has taken place during the last phase of the war in Sri Lanka.

Human Rights Watch plans to show the film on coming Friday at a side event.

In 2012 GoSL organised a side event and showed its own film, a responses to Sri Lanka Killing Fields by the same TV station Channel 4.

The letter sent by the GoSL, in theory calls for a total ban on all critical literature related to member countries of the UN.  It says that ” the timing and vane of this screening clearly demonstrates that it is aimed at influencing the debate in the council on Sri Lanka. It is therefore our earnest view that the Council should not facilitate such a process that undermines its own work and the engagement of its members with the Council, and leaves it vulnerable to politicization.”

The meaning of side events are of course to create a open discussion on related issues and influences the decision making process in a transparent way. If the GoSL wants to ban such activities, then thee will be no use of civil society participation in the UNHRC, a leading Sri Lankan Human Rights Defender told SLB.

Read  the letter sent by the GoSL as a PDF.