Peace for the World

Peace for the World
First democratic leader of Justice the Godfather of the Sri Lankan Tamil Struggle: Honourable Samuel James Veluppillai Chelvanayakam

Friday, March 1, 2013


Is the U.S. Resolution on Sri Lanka Justified?

: 02/28/2013 
worldSri Lanka faces its second United States sponsored resolution in as many years at the ongoing United Nations Human Rights Council in Geneva.
The Sri Lankan government has declared that it willnot accept the new resolution, describing it as country specific and unsupportive of the regime. INGOs and foreign governments concerned over the apparent lack of progress in Sri Lanka have been campaigning to have this resolution passed in an attempt to force the government in to action.
Are these resolutions in the best interest of the country or targeting the ruling regime of Sri Lanka as the government claims?
The upcoming U.S. sponsored resolution is, in actuality, a follow up to the first resolution titled "Promoting Accountability and Reconciliation in Sri Lanka." That resolution was tabled at the 19th session of the UNHRC and was passed with 24 votes in favour, 15 against and 8 abstentions.
This original resolution, which saw widespread protests in Sri Lanka, addressed three main points. It first called upon the government of Sri Lanka to implement its own appointed "Lessons Learnt and Reconciliation Commission" (LLRC) report. This was to ensure accountability and reconciliation is achieved in the country. The resolution also requested the government to produce a comprehensive action plan detailing the steps they will take in implementing the LLRC report. Finally it encouraged the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights to provide advice and assistance and the government to accept it when implementing its action plan.
A year since the adoption of the previous resolution has seen little in the way of meaningful steps towards implementing a sustainable plan of reconciliation. The action plan produced by the government has been criticised domestically and internationally as having ignored key LLRC recommendations.
The UNHRC and numerous foreign governments continue to remain concerned over the apparent disregard by the government to the promises it had undertaken at the passing of the previous resolution.
In the past year the situation in Sri Lanka, regarding its human rights record, has deteriorated. The continual harassment of free speech and the encroachment of the executive over the independence of the judiciary are just a few examples.
In July last year a prison in the North of the country, Vavuniya, was a scene of a hostage crisisfollowing a riot by the inmates over the transfer of a fellow prisoner. However, the real issue did not arise until after the situation was brought under control by the police. Following the resolving of the hostage crisis several inmates, all suspected Tamil tigers, were transferred to a hospital in the South of the country having sustained injuries during the showdown. Ganeshan Nimalaruban, one of the injured inmates, died from the injuries sustained leading to numerous unanswered questions over his treatment. No meaningful investigations were held in to this incident.
Similarly in November of 2012 another prison riot broke out at the maximum security prison in capital Colombo. After several hours of a standoff between police and armed inmates the army was deployed resulting in the death of 23 inmates and a further 43 injured. Despite claims that investigations had been undertaken by the authorities in to the incident, no one has been found responsible for the blatant overuse of force by the army. Furthermore the use of the army in this situation is in contradiction to the LLRC's suggestion to reduce the role of the military.
Similarly media freedom in the country has continued to be downtrodden with journalists being assaulted and armed assailants attacking them in their homes. The authorities have failed to arrest anyone in connection to these assaults, raising questions over the sincerity of the government to uphold media freedom.
In fact, the government has gone one step further towards unopposed rule. For the first time in the country's history the President successfully impeached a Chief Justice (CJ) of the Supreme Court. The CJ, Dr. Shirani A. Banadaranayke, was accused of improper conduct and influencing the process of the delivery of justice. Despite the Supreme Court ruling that the process followed by the government in their impeachment motion was illegal, the CJ was removed from office.
Incidentally the impeachment came about following the CJ's decision to rule against a controversial bill aimed at increasing the powers of the Economic Minister and brother of the President. Whether the impeachment of Dr. Banadaranayke and her over-ruling of the bill are linked remains to be decided. However, the government has shown no hesitancy to encroach upon the independence of the Judiciary.
The Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights released a report earlier this month calling upon the government to continue to take steps forward in dealing with the issues of human rights and reconciliation. This hard hitting document outlined the shortcomings of the government in abiding by its promises made last year.
While the details of the pending U.S. resolution remains unknown for the time being, it is expected that it will once again call on the Sri Lankan government to work towards reconciliation and open up its doors to international monitors.
Judging by the continued downward trend of the human rights situation in Sri Lanka and lack of reconciliation, there seems to be little evidence to strengthen the government's declaration that it will not accept the new resolution.
With the U.S., Europe and India expected to support the new resolution, it is highly likely that this new resolution will also be adopted. What impact it will have on the situation in Sri Lanka remains to be seen.

Condemn genocide in a single-line resolution at Geneva: AIADMK tells New Delhi

TamilNet[TamilNet, Friday, 01 March 2013, 00:28 GMT]
“India should move a single-line resolution in the Council condemning the genocide of Tamils in Sri Lanka and demand an independent international investigation,” said AIADMK’s MP, Dr. Maitreyan, during the parliamentary debate in New Delhi on Wednesday. Citing Tamil Nadu Chief Minister Ms. Jayalalithaa linking the war crimes to the days of the Nazi Germany of Hitler, Dr. V. Maitreyan condemned Indian Foreign Minister calling Sri Lanka a friendly country. “Sri Lanka, as a friendly country, is a thing of the past. How can a country, which carried out a systematic genocide of my umbilical-cord brethren, Tamils, be termed as a friendly country,” he asked, blaming India for diluting the impact of the UNHRC resolution last year, by softening its tone, tenor and contents. 

Maithreyan
The UPA government refuses to accept the root cause of the conflict. India’s Foreign Ministers have changed but nothing changed in Sri Lanka. In fact it has gone from bad to worse, Dr. Maitreyan further said.

Speaking at the debate, Communist Party of India’s National Secretary, Mr D. Raja said, “After 2009, what is happening today is a structural genocide.”

There were interruptions when Mr Raja said that the Indian government collaborated with the Sri Lankan government in the genocide of Tamils.

“I want the government to put its hand on its heart and tell us whether or not the Government collaborates with the Sri Lankan Government in the genocide of Tamil people,” Raja asked the Indian Government to “be truthful to the nation.”

“Mr Rajapaksa has confirmed it, but I am asking the Government today, did you support the war waged by the Sri Lankan Government on Tamil people? I am asking you to place the facts. Otherwise, we would get the facts from the Sri Lankan Government,” Raja said.

At this point, amidst interruptions, Dr Maitreyan reminded to the house that it was Rajapaksa who had gone on record saying that it was because of India that they had won the war and that they were only proxies. India has not denied it officially, Maitreyan said.

Raja criticized the Indian Government harping on the 13th Amendment.

D. Raja
He came hard on the Foreign Minister for saying, “we would encourage the United States and Sri Lanka to directly engage on the draft resolution and aim for a mutually acceptable outcome.”

“I feel very much ashamed of this. How can you say that let America and Sri Lanka talk to each other and come to some understanding, and we will be spectators,” Raja asked.

Citing the times of Nehru and Indira Gandhi, Raja said, “I accuse the Congress-led UPA-II Government that they are letting down this nation.”

It is not just one war crime or human right violation. It is genocide […] We cannot be spectators, meek onlookers and leave it to the US and Sri Lanka, Raja said, urging that India should move the resolution, vote against Sri Lanka and demand an international investigation into the war crimes and human rights violations. 

“Otherwise, we will betray the trust that history has in India,” he concluded.

DMK’s Tiruchi Siva speaking at the debate told the Government to decide itself, “whether you want to be friendly with the inhuman and unfriendly country which is butchering its own people or whether you want to maintain friendship with your brethren in the southern part of this country?”

Mr D. Bandyopadhyay from West Bengal and BJP’s Venkaiah Naidu from Karnataka were among the members demanding action from the Indian Government in favour of Tamils in the island.

Guatemalan Genocide : How they nailed the dictator



07 FEBRUARY 2013
BY MIKE ALLISON

In a remarkable development from the Americas, former Guatemalan president José Efraín Ríos Montt was ordered to stand trial for genocide and crimes against humanity carried out during his seventeen month dictatorship between 1982 and 1983. Rios Montt is the first former head of state in the Americas to stand trial for genocide in a national court. While he has not yet been convicted of anything, Monday's legal outcome is a victory for his victims, domestic and international human rights organisations, and the Guatemalan people.
During Guatemala's thirty-six year conflict between 1960 and 1996, over 200,000 Guatemalans were killed and another 45,000 disappeared at the hands of the state's security forces. Over one-hundred thousand are believed to have perished during the scorched earth campaign carried out in the early 1980s when Rios Montt and, prior to him, Romeo Lucas García served as de facto heads of state.
Rios Montt lost his immunity which he had held as a sitting member of congress last January. Shortly afterwards, he was arrested. At the time, I had hoped that he simply would have stood before the court and accepted responsibility for the violence that he ordered thirty years ago. If he believed what he ordered was necessary to save the country from the threat posed by the leftist Guatemalan National Revolutionary Unit, he should have said so. In no way would that excuse him for the crimes that he committed.
Instead, he and his lawyers presented 75 legal challenges to have the charges dismissed. His defence lawyer Danilo Rodriguez, ironically enough a former guerrilla of twenty-two years, and others speaking for the general argued, at various points, that Rios Montt was unaware of what was going on in the Ixil Triangle, was not really in control of what his subordinates were doing, could not be prosecuted because of an amnesty law, he was not physically there so he could not be responsible, and the killings took place in the heat of battle. In effect, Rios Montt has done everything possible to avoid responsibility.

Evidence of atrocities
Following three days of testimony, Judge Miguel Angel Galvez ruled that there was sufficient evidence to try Rios Montt on charges of genocide and crimes against humanity for ordering fifteen massacres involving the killing of 1,771 indigenous Ixiles in the department of Quiché between March 1982 and August 1983. The judgelistened to witness testimony, historical, military and psychological reports, forensic reports from numerous exhumations, military plans, ballistic evidence, and death certificates. During these massacres, women and young girls were raped and killed. Young children and elders were executed. Men, women, and children were tortured. After having their homes and crops burned to the ground, twenty-nine thousand Ixil survivors then fled to the mountains where they were then harassed and persecuted by the Guatemalan armed forces while living in "subhuman conditions". In addition to Rios Montt, the court found sufficient evidence to send former Director of Military Intelligence José Mauricio Rodríguez Sánchez to trial for having been an intellectual author of Plan Victoria 82, Plan Sofia and Plan Firmeza 83 authorising attacks against the civilian population.
While they do not appear to have been close during or after the war, Guatemala's current President Otto Pérez Molina served as a regional commander in the Ixil region during the period that the massacres took place. In the past, the president has denied that any massacres took place during the conflict at the hands of the government's security forces. However, President Molina has remained quiet during the current hearings and has conveniently been out of the country attending the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland where he is promoting an alternative to the current war on drugs.
There is real uncertainty as to how Molina will respond to these new developments and to the potential for guilty verdicts that recognise the military in which he served having committed genocide and crimes against humanity. He was a regional commander in Nebaj who oversaw population control during the military's counterinsurgency operations during the time in question, but the evidence is inconclusive as to where he was during the massacres in question.
Rios Montt and Rodríguez Sánchez's trial will once again shine light on the United States' role in Guatemala's civil war. On the one hand, it's rather simple. The US supported a Guatemalan government that was responsible for the vast majority of human rights violations carried out during the country's thirty-six year conflict. The US provided military, economic, and political assistance to the Guatemalan government and military during this period. The conflict might not even have occurred had the US not been the driving force behind the 1954 coup organised by its Central Intelligence Agency to unseat the democratically-elected reformist government of Jacobo Árbenz.
While the US was primarily involved in Guatemala because of Cold War fears, that does not excuse its support for the Guatemalan government. However, the Guatemalan leaders did not take orders from the US government. In fact, when the US said that it would link security assistance to improvements in its human rights performance the Guatemalan government said that it did not need the US's help especially after it had just lost a counterinsurgency war to the Vietnamese. And at least one time when the US invited Guatemala to send its soldiers for training at the School of the Americas in Fort Benning, Georgia, the Guatemalan government responded that they would only send their soldiers as instructors, not as students.
Coming to terms
Since the war ended in 1996, President Bill Clinton has apologized for the support that the US provided to the Guatemalan government. Although imperfect, it has released thousands of documents that shed light on what happened during the conflict, several of which have been used in trials here in Guatemala. The US has moved to arrest and deport Guatemalan military officers involved in the 1982 Dos Erres massacre. And, finally, former Ambassador Stephen McFarland attended legal hearings in support of victims of the armed conflict in 2009 and 2010.
While Guatemalan military and government officials are primarily responsible for the violence perpetrated against its citizens, that should not make Americans feel any better. At a minimum, the US should recognise its complicity in the violence against Mayan civilians in Guatemala especially, but not limited to, the Reagan administration. It should declare its support for the victims of the armed conflict to pursue legal actions against those responsible for gross human rights violations, including genocide and crimes against humanity. It should release all relevant documents that shed light on the terror including those that implicate US citizens. The US should also work with the Guatemalan government and people to implement development projects aimed at assisting those communities who suffered at the hands of state violence during the 1980s and continue to do so today. This is not an exhaustive list, but it is a start.
In the last few years, though small in number, Guatemalan courts have successfully prosecuted members of the country's self-defence patrols, military commissioners, military officers, Kaibiles, and police for a variety of crimes committed during the armed conflict, an armed conflict in which the Guatemalan government purposefully targeted civilians in a campaign of genocide. On Monday, they moved one step closer to holding accountable those responsible for genocide and crimes against humanity.
 © Al Jazeera

Mike Allison is an associate professor in the Political Science department at the University of Scranton, Pennsylvania and currently works in Guatemala on a Fulbright Scholarship.
Despite  strong protest lodged by the Sri Lanka government  concerning war crimes in Sri lanka, the Channel 4 documentary film,  "No Fire Zone: The killing fields of Sri Lanka" will be screened today Friday.


This documentary film would be shown to the 47 membership countries of UN Human Rights Council.   Geneva information notifies regarding this, all arrangements have been processed.

Reports states, observers of the Human Rights Council, including INGOs will be present to view this.  Meanwhile "No Fire Zone" producer Kelum Mackrey will narrate in relation to the credibility of the documentary to the international delegates. He would point out many vital issues is according sources.

Sri Lanka government made a request that the documentary film concerning war crimes should not be permitted to screen at the Human Rights Council sessions.

Sri Lanka government rejected stating that the said video clip is fake and screening is contrary to the policy of the Council including many issues were pointed in a letter by Permanent Representative of Sri Lanka to the UN Ambassador Ravinatha Aryasinha to President of the UN Human Rights Council.

 Meanwhile response to this letter was not forwarded by Human Rights Council to Sri Lanka.

In this state, “No Fire Zone" the documentary film is screened today despite protest from Sri Lanka. This was sanctioned by UN Human Rights Council's Commissioner Nawaneethampillai . This has caused severe disappointment to the Sri lanka government.

After the said documentary film is viewed, the countries in supportive of Sri Lanka too, may come to a state of supporting the US resolution was said by Channel 4 TV organization.

British Channel 4 TV organization previously with evidences produced and screened documentary films concerning war crimes which was stated occurred at the final phase of war in Sri Lanka, and this time, a new video with the title "No Fire Zone: consisting war crimes is being produced.

Even though Sri Lanka has rejected this documentary film, this issue amidst the international wide has created massive shock waves. Consequent to the screening of some portions from this documentary film in Tamil Nadu,  all the Tamil Nadu parties have raised protest flags against Sri Lanka.

Scenes of Tamil Eelam Liberation tiger movement Leader Velupillai Pirabakaran's son Balachandran after surrendering to the military, later assassinated is also with evidences recorded in this new documentary film.

After this documentary is shown in Geneva, this will create massive crisis international wide to Sri Lanka was pointed out by Political Observers, and this documentary film will pave way to international war crime probe was further mentioned by them.


LTTE ropes in more British MPs

Campaign for war crimes probe:No Fire Zone screened in UK parliament

 
article_image
Suren

By Shamindra Ferdinando

Amidst Sri Lanka’s protests against the screening of No Fire Zone: The Killing Fields of Sri Lanka at the ongoing United Nations Human Rights Council (UNHRC) sessions in Geneva, the British government allowed the screening of the controversial documentary produced by the UK media outfit Channel 4 News in the British Parliament.

The screening took place in the Committee Room 14 of the British Parliament on Feb. 27 with the participation of Deputy Prime Minister Nick Clegg, Leader of the Liberal Democrats and two cabinet ministers, Secretary of State for Northern Ireland Teresa Villiers and Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change Ed Davey, representing the Liberal Democrats.

The conference coincided with the third anniversary of the UK-based Global Tamil Forum (GTF).

GTF spokesperson Suren Surendiran told The Island yesterday that there had been a significant shift in the British coalition government policy towards Sri Lanka with Liberal  Democrats calling for an international war crime investigation.

Responding to a query, Surendiran said that the Opposition and Labour Party Leader Ed Miliband, too, had called for an international independent investigation. The GTF spokesman vowed to continue their campaign until the international community hauled Sri Lanka’s political and military leaders responsible up before a war crimes tribunal.

Although British PM David Cameroon hadn’t been present, the Conservative Party leader had been represented by the most senior party member Grant Shapps, MP, Surendiran said, while appreciating the Premier issuing a comprehensive statement for the conference brochure. Shapps addressed the gathering.

Commenting on ongoing GTF efforts to prevent Commonwealth Heads of Government Meeting (CHOGM) being held in Sri Lanka in November this year, Surendiran said that the Labour Party as well as former Foreign Secretary David Miliband had called for change of venue. They alleged the GoSL had failed to adhere to Commonwealth principle. Surendiran said that the position taken by the Labour Party would bolster GTF’s efforts to have an international war crimes probe launched against Sri Lanka.

Sandya Ekneligoda, wife of missing media personality Prageeth couldn’t attend the conference due to late application for visa though she was scheduled to address the gathering.

Former Norwegian Minister in charge of Sri Lanka’s peace process Erik Solheim reiterated that reconciliation wouldn’t be reality as long as the government failed to address accountability issues.

Surendiran said that the Tamil Diaspora greatly appreciated the presence of top leaders of Labour, Liberal Democrats and Conservatives.

Senior Foreign Minister Baroness Warsi stressed that the government hadn’t taken a decision on attending CHOGM in Sri Lanka.

TNA was represented by five senior members including TNA leader MR Sampanthan and M. A. Sumanthiran.

Among the British MPs present were Siobhain McDonagh, Robert Halfon, Lee Scott, Kerry McCarthy, Douglas Alexander, Simon Huges and Keith Vaz.

Lanka should investigate allegations of rights abuses: US

Concerned over the alleged human rights violations in Sri Lanka, the US has accused the country for not initiating credible and independent investigations into the matter so far.
“To date, the Government of Sri Lanka has not initiated a full, credible, or independent investigation into longstanding allegations of human rights abuses in Sri Lanka, including sexual assault,” Patrick Ventrell, the State Department spokesman told reporters.
“I understand we just got it a day or so ago. But we do note our strong concern about human rights violations and violations of international humanitarian law in Sri Lanka,” he said.
The US, he said, is reviewing the lengthy and extensive report of the UN Human Rights on Lanka.

Listening To Sri Lanka’s Painful Presentation


By Usha S Sri-Skanda-Rajah -March 1, 2013 
Usha S Sri-Skanda-Rajah
Colombo TelegraphSri Lanka’s 22nd UNHRC Presentation: A Regurgitation of Old Undelivered Promises – Its Defiance Shows NO Domestic Mechanism Will Elicit the Truth With or Without UN Monitoring
Is the proposed UNHRC resolution heading nowhere? Would the rehashing of old undelivered promises and the continued defiance of the military, still maintaining its claim of zero civilian casualties be enough for Sri Lanka to go home celebrating: Are countries preparing for the long haul, giving Sri Lanka the luxury of time, at the expense of justice for the victims? Or is the noose tightening on the Rajapaksas? An Opinion.
Introduction
Listening to Mahinda Samarasinghe making his presentation for Sri Lankaat the 22nd session of the UN Human Rights Council was painful. There was no substance in his report. Period! It was merely a regurgitation of the Sri Lankan government’s past presentations, characterized by the usual lack of any substantive action. It was a complete rehash of past promises that to this day has yet to materialise. It was an insult to the intelligence of those listening! Whether the members of the UNHRC would swallow it hook line and sinker as on previous occasions will be known in a few days. The world awaits in anticipation but there is little hope that any concrete steps will be taken by the members of the UNHRC to move to the next phase of investigating Sri Lanka’s conduct of the war and its mass killing of civilians through an independent international body; thereby putting an end to the continuing culture of government impunity and the defiance of the army that still maintains it followed a policy of “zero civilian casualties” in the war, putting the blame on civilian casualties onLTTE as per its “new plan of action” to implement the LLRC “observations”.
The next phase should include an international human rights field presence, an international protective mechanism, in the Tamil heartland of the NorthEast to prevent military and government abuses and intransigencies now happening in the occupied Tamil heartland. Transnational Government of Tamil Eelam (TGTE) is putting this initiative front and centre in its engagement this session in addition to an international independent inquiry.
I would call Sri Lanka’s Minister for Plantation Industries and Special Envoy to President Rajapaksa, Mr. Samarasinghe’s speech the biggest bluff that has been foisted on the world, a presentation devoid of integrity and delivered with no compunction; hopefully not on a gullible and unsuspecting audience.
Sri Lankacouldn’t have fooled those of us who keep a close watch on the ground situation.
Tamil MP appeals to IC to “Save Country from this Government”
Earlier Mathiapranam Sumanthiran, Tamil National Alliance MP, was scathing in his remarks about the Sri Lankan government’s gross inaction and appealed to the international community to save the country from the Sri Lankan government: “Not one recommendation of the LLRC has been implemented, not one item in the National Action Plan has been touched,” he said as he cried out to the world to “save the country from this government..”
Government’s 5 Rs Refuted
Referring to the 5 Rs i.e. Reconstruction Resettlement Rehabilitation, Reintegration and Reconciliation Mr. Samarasinhe, proudly claimed all of the Rs have been achieved. Dr Paul Newman, from the Bangalore University vigorously refuted such claims in his article: Lies Retold – The Annual Sri Lankan Ritual at the UNHRC:
“More than 93,000 people are estimated to still be displaced as of late December 2012, living in camps in Vavuniya,Jaffna and Trincomalee districts, in transit sites or with host communities. Source: Internal Displacement Monitoring Centre (January 24, 2013)….In Jaffna alone 70,000 Tamils are yet to return home as their land is occupied as High Security Zones. The entirevillage of Mullikulamis displaced into the jungles and a naval complex is coming up the area. In Jaffna the Talsevana military resort has come up in the place of land occupied from Tamils,” he writes.
Misleading claims
At a glance my own observations on the pronouncements made by Mr. Samarasinghe centered round subtle but serious misrepresentations. The 27% growth in the GDP in the North was misleading. The 27% growth rate in the North does not reflect any improvement in quality of life of ordinary Tamil people but is due to the unbridled expansion of the Military in the NorthEast and the huge expenses including salaries that comes with it.
Question to address: were measure taken in self defence legal?
The court of inquiry by the army commander on civilian casualties has been mentioned before and is mentioned again. There is already a report out in the public domain which the Army Board prepared on the implementations of the LLRC observations that was handed to Gotabaya Rajapaksa. It found that Sri Lanka “as a sovereign state has an inherent right to self defence” and that the Sri Lankan army’s actions were essentially to destroy a terrorist organization in defense of the land: “Sri Lanka having the “absolute right to take all legal measure necessary to restore law and order arising…(among other) out of terrorism,” it concluded. The focus here should be on “legal measures” whether the measures taken were legal in accordance with international law. If the Sri Lankan army has only taken “legal measure” it need not hesitate in the least to submit to an international inquiry.
Army sticking to its claim that casualties caused by LTTE only
Further the “Plan of Action” proposed by the Army Board on implementation of the Recommendations of the LLRC that has been submitted at this session is a white wash in my opinion and points to civilian deaths committed by the LTTE only, the army still sticking to the claim that it maintained a policy of “zero civilian casualties”: “The so called civilian casualties are mainly consisted of LTTE cadres killed in combat, civilians killed by LTTE for political and other ends and civilians killed by the LTTE whilst attempting to flee LTTE held areas,” and that the “The S.L. Constitution and the existing legal framework are adequate to safeguard Human Rights,” the report concluded. In other words is the army sayingSri Lankais not going to consider international law although it has to adhere to the UN Charter and United Nations Declaration on Human Rights and other treaties it has signed up to? I knowSri Lankahas not signed on to the Statute of Rome but it has ratified in 1959 the Geneva Conventions 1-1V (not protocols1-3) that govern many of the laws pertaining to war.
Will the roles of Senior Military and Political leaders including the President be inquired into in an Army Court of inquiry?
An inquiry into allegations of Sri Lankan army atrocities committed by the top brass both political and military by the Sri Lankan army would amount to nothing. Not only is the military investigating its own, the question that the TGTE would need answers to is whether the inquiry would go far enough; especially when it involves the whole sale massacre of innocent civilians and the government is defiant that it did not kill civilians. An inquiry that does not involve President Rajapaksa, Gotabaya Rajapaksa, Sarath Fonseka, Palitha Kohone, Shavendra Silva and other commanders of various divisions including the Navy and Air Force would not serve the cause of justice for the tens of thousands who perished in what the Tamil people and the TGTE insist was genocide.
It’s important to bear in mind that the Sri Lankan army’s image now stands battered beyond repair under its Commander in Chief, President Rajapaksa and Defence Minister Gotabaya Rajapaksa, the latest allegations coming from Human Rights Watch which reported on 75 cases of sexual abuse including rape and torturecommitted by members of the Sri Lankan armed forces on Tamil detainees.
Slamming UN Officers doing their duty,
Mr. Samarasinghe’s lambasting of the High Commissioner for Human Rights, Ms Navi Pillay and the OHCHR was out of order and shows the Sri Lankan government’s edginess when it comes to objective criticism and illustrates what their future response would be to UN officers and UN mandate holders doing their duty. Will Sri Lanka willingly cooperate with UN experts monitoring Sri Lanka’s implementation of the LLRC recommendations? Although Mr. Samarasinghe touched on it, blaming the High Commissioner for sending emissaries only to obtain information for her report the question of further cooperation between the two on the implementation of the LLRC remains to be seen. Whether the intended resolution for a UN monitoring service to force Sri Lanka into action is something that Sri Lanka would agree to, also remain to be seen. This question was raised by  Dinouk Colombage in his article: Is the US resolution on Sri Lanka justified?
Social Progress not true
The ‘Social Progress’ Mr. Samarasinghe mentioned, achieved through “strengthening of the civil administration” and by the “provision of livelihood support” is not true. There is still 1 army personnel to 5 civilian in the NorthEast. The Military Governor is now ruling the Tamil heartland with orders coming from the President and his brothers, namely Basil Rajapaksa from the Ministry of Economic development and Gotabaya Rajapaksa from the Ministry of Defence and Urban Development. The kind of military corporate culture that exists is not found in any other military in any part of the world; I am talking about the army selling its produce to the public on a corporate scale. The manipulation of the demographic composition by government sponsored colonization to bring in ethnic Sinhalese, the take over of private and state owned land including arable land for military purposes, not to mention the movement of a disproportionate number of Sinhala fishermen into the area, have all negatively impacted the livelihood opportunities of the indigenous ethnic Tamil population.
Zero progress on Trinco and ACF cases
The presentation lacked any fresh new initiatives or showed any progress made on earlier fronts. The same line, the same lies were repeated yet again. With regard to cases relating to the execution style murders of 5 Trinco students and 17 ACF aid workers, Mr. Samarasinge was regurgitating the steps the government promised to take in its previous reports. The government is still on the non summary proceedings stage with regard to the student murders. It is an outrage to keep listening to the same lies over and over again.
As to the LLRC recommendation to inquire into allegations contained in the Channel 4 documentary Killing Fields, Mr. Samrasinghe said that it would be the government’s next task – although these very words were repeated in the National Action Plan submitted at the UPR.
UNHRC must address allegations in two imminent reports
It is time the UNHCR officially looked into the findings of two eminent reports sponsored by the UN itself, namely the Expert Panel Report and the Internal Review Panel Report, both of which point to serious allegations that must be investigated by an independent commission. UN Secretary General Ban Ki Moon’s failure to pass on the Expert Panel Report to the UNHCR, his failure to invoke article 99 of the UN Charter during and after the last stages of the war, are matters that require addressing .The Security Council’s failure to act to prevent the carnage and apply the principle of Responsibility To Protect, R2P and the serious matter of UN complicity in the bloodbath that occurred cannot be ignored.
TGTE wants Special Adviser’s report on genocide made public
The TGTE itself wants the report that the Special Adviser on the Prevention of Genocide prepared during the last stages of the war but never released to be made public, which was referred to in the Internal Review Panel Report. The TGTE Prime Minister Visuvanathan Rudrakumaran said the TGTE is focusing on two major issues at these sessions: “Firstly calling for an international independent investigation with a view to bringing justice for the victims of genocide; Secondly TGTE will focus on Tamil ethnocentric human rights violations rather than ethno neutral violations,” he explained.
A case for an international independent investigation has been made
The erosion of democratic values, the breakdown in the rule of law, the end of a functioning independent judiciary and the move to a fully fledged dictatorship all go to advance the arguments that there is no alternative to an international independent investigation, although 40,000 deaths (and possibly more) according Kenneth Roth of the HRW should “be reason enough” for such an inquiry.
It is shameful that Sri Lankacould stand up in this august body and report no progress since the last resolution during the 19th session that called for the implementation of the LLRC recommendations. It is shameful that having made no progress what so everSri Lanka has the gall to appear before the Council without delivering the goods; at least to show some results.
Allow international media and INGOs free access
For an independent verification of the true ground situation,Sri Lankamust allow free access to the international media and free movement for major INGO’s. The veteran human rights defender and activist DrBrian Senewiratne, Senator of the TGTE has vehemently stated that this is indeed a priority more than anything else in a country still operating under the dreaded PTA; where the people are muzzled and cannot speak unless in stage managed circumstances under the watchful eye of the military; where there is a concerted effort to destroy the Tamil identity, culture and language even religions in the name of integration: “Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch and International Crisis Group must now be admitted to the Tamil North & East immediately. There cannot now be any reason to exclude internationally credible human rights organisations from the area,” the Senator stated.
Heed Clergy on ground situation
A group of concerned Christian clergy men and women in the NorthEast made an appeal to the High Commissioner, Ms Pillay to go beyond the last resolution: “We feel that the killing and disappearance of tens of thousands of Tamil people and actions that are suppressing the Tamil people and community, our culture, religions, language and, land in a systematic way before, during and after the war appears to be done with an intent to destroy us in whole or in part and thus, it is imperative that the international community addresses this seriously even at this late stage,” they stated in their letter.
A week resolution in the cards, justice delayed is justice denied
As the UNHRC debates, the rest of us know what to expect: another lukewarm resolution brought by theUS.Robert O’Blake, Secretary of State for South and Central Asian Affairs was speaking to the US House Foreign Affairs Committee, Subcommittee on Asia and the Pacific: “I think there is good support thus far to have another vote this year to continue to urge Sri Lanka to implement its own report and that’s why we are pursuing that again this year,” he said sharing the “disappointment” that the US felt at “ Sri Lankas’s failure to address several issues including the implementation of the LLRC action plan, further stating that “the government has not proceeded so far with elections for the Northern Provincial Council, four years after the end of the war.”
Reading Esther Brimmer’s remarks that the “The United States hopes this resolution will be a cooperative effort with the Sri Lankan government,” pretty much indicated to me the contents of the resolution.
Indian External Affairs Minister Salman Kurshid’s refusal to disclose to Rajya Sabha members, the contents of the draft resolution and to state how India would vote, that elicited a walkout by all the Tamil parties in Tamil Nadu, AIDMK, DMK and leftist parties, again smacks of India’s duplicity in this matter and its leanings towards the Rajapaksas.
Issues of sovereignty seem to prevail over the need to catch and punish the perpetrators of mass atrocity crimes. Are countries then preparing for the long haul at the expense of justice for the victims? Or is this a way to pin the Sri Lankan government into a corner?
Sri Lanka ready to party until the next time? Or is the noose tightening on the Rajapaksas?
Is the UNHRC resolution heading nowhere? Is the Sri Lankan government of Mahinda Rajapaksa preparing to party yet again as it stands defiant about its conduct of the war and accountability for civilian casualties, where the diplomatic community would be invited to wine and dine and forget about their country’s legal and moral obligations towards justice and against impunity until the next time! Or is the noose tightening on the Rajapaksas?
*Usha S Sri-Skanda-Rajah – Chair, TGTE Senate

ALARMING NEW EVIDENCE FROM UKBA ON REMOVALS TO SRI LANKA


Damning evidence obtained by Freedom from Torture confirms that since the end of the Sri Lankan civil war, the UK has granted refugee status to at least 15 people who were previously removed from the UK to Sri Lanka where they claim to have been tortured or otherwise harmed.
The disclosures by the UK Border Agency (UKBA) cover the period May 2009 to September 2012 and were in response to a Freedom of Information (FOI) request, lodged by Freedom from Torture in November 2012.
The response was sent to Freedom from Torture in the middle of an important case being heard by the Immigration and Asylum Chamber of the Upper Tribunal on the risks facing Tamils on return to Sri Lanka from the UK. Evidence supplied by Freedom from Torture of Tamils with even low level (real or imputed) links to the LTTE experiencing torture after voluntary return to Sri Lanka in the post-conflict period is central to the case.
Statistics for the last quarter of 2012 have been withheld by the UKBA until 28 February, the very same date that the Agency is believed to be planning another mass removal flight to Sri Lanka, including for Tamils whose protection claims have been refused.
The FOI disclosures contradict repeated claims by Ministers that there is no credible evidence that Tamils removed from the UK have faced torture in Sri Lanka. These denials, trumpeted by the Sri Lankan government, were reiterated earlier this month by Foreign and Commonwealth Office (FCO) Minister Alistair Burt during a trip to Sri Lanka. However, in the face of the UKBA's new disclosures to Freedom from Torture, the FCO told the Guardian that it is "urgently seeking further information from the Home Office about any allegations".
For its part, the UKBA has told the same newspaper that it does not want to "prejudice the outcome of the court case by commenting further" on what it does or does not know about the fate of those it has removed to Sri Lanka, but there is no indication yet that it is preparing to suspend removal directions for Tamils falling within the risk category that Freedom from Torture has identified.
Keith Best, Chief Executive of Freedom from Torture, said:
"After months of churning out guidance for asylum decision-makers designed to discredit the research of Freedom from Torture and other NGOs, the UKBA has finally come clean about its own evidence, which strongly suggests that it has removed people who have subsequently suffered torture or other ill-treatment at the hands of the Sri Lankan authorities.
"It beggars belief that the UK government is still prepared to forcibly return more Tamils when its removals policy for Sri Lanka remains so out of date and before the judiciary, which is considering the policy right now, has a chance to rule on the matter. We have shown that those with even low level LTTE links, whether real or perceived, are at risk of torture but our warnings have not yet been acted upon."
Freedom from Torture's evidence of torture of Tamils who have voluntarily returned to Sri Lanka in the post-conflict period is available here.