Israel committed to Lanka’s economic
development, Israeli Peres tells Prof. Peiris.

February 27, 2013, 10:36 pm

Israeli President Shimon Peres, congratulating Sri Lanka on her achievement in eradicating terrorism, said Tuesday (26) that Israel stands firmly committed to supporting the development of the country’s economy in the prevailing environment of peace and stability.

He made these remarks when External Affairs Minister Prof. G.L. Peiris, called on him at the President’s Office in Jerusalem.

Minister Peiris explained to President Peres the steps being taken by the government of Sri Lanka to carry forward development and reconciliation after the thirty year conflict, and the progress which had been achieved in the different sectors. He emphasized inclusivity as the basis of Sri Lanka’s approach, with the objective that all the people of the country would benefit from the development now taking place. The Minister described the benefits flowing from the priority accorded by the government to the improvement of infrastructure, including highways, railroad systems, harbours and airports. He briefed President Peres about the challenges which Sri Lanka is currently facing at the international level.

The President of Israel, reaffirming that his country’s assistance is readily available to Sri Lanka, discussed with the visiting Sri Lankan Minister areas in which inputs from Israel would be of particular value. President Peres and Minister Peiris discussed Israel’s special expertise with regard to water, and the usefulness of further projects connected with drip irrigation, an area in which Israel has developed sophisticated techniques and other aids to agricultural productivity. The other fields identified for collaboration included micro finance for cottage industries and small and medium scale rural projects and skills development among youth by having recourse to information technology. Reference was made to the importance of strengthening links among the business communities in the two countries to operationalize projects in the selected fields rapidly.

Peiris visits Israel and Palestine
Photographs: Israel Ministry of Foreign Affairs Facebook page-02 March 2013

Lanka’s Foreign Minister GL Peiris has had a busy schedule over the last week, visiting both Palestinian and Israeli Presidents in visits to Ramallah and Jerusalem.

On meeting Palestinian President Mahmood Abbas in Ramallah, the Sri Lankan Ministry of Defence reported,

“President Abbas, recalling with his visits to Sri Lanka in 2008 and 2012, said that he was grateful to President Mahinda Rajapaksa who, as President of the Palestinian Solidarity Movement in Sri Lanka for over 35 years, identified very closely with the aspirations of the Palestinian people.
He said that the Palestinian Foreign Relations Commission expressed solidarity with Sri Lanka during its war against terrorism and continues to support Sri Lanka strongly in all its initiatives after the achievement of peace”.

Meanwhile the Jerusalem Post reported that Peiris had been on a “private visit” in the West Bank and Ramallah, prior to his three day stay in Israel where he met President Shimon Peres, Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu and Intelligence Affairs Minister Dan Meridor.

Peiris spoke at the University of Tel Aviv and, according to The Island, “briefed President Peres about the challenges which Sri Lanka is currently facing at the international level”.

The Jerusalem Post went on to say,

"Israel and Sri Lanka renewed diplomatic ties in 2000, and reportedly have a robust military relationship. Israeli weaponry, including Kfir planes and naval boats, have been attributed with helping the Sri Lankan government defeat the Tamil Tigers in 2009".

Palestine a steadfast friend of Lanka - Abbas

2/26/2013

Palestine's President Mahmoud Abbas said his country deeply appreciated the consistent goodwill and support it had received from Sri Lanka throughout its struggle for international recognition.

He told Minister of External Affairs Professor G. L. Peiris that Palestine could always be counted on as a steadfast friend of Sri Lanka.

Minister Peiris who met Abbas in Ramallah on Sunday expressed Sri Lanka's pleasure with the adoption of the historic resolution on enhancement of the status of Palestine in the United Nations and the support extended by 138 countries in the United Nations General Assembly to upgrade the status of Palestine as a Non-Member Observer State. He said that Sri Lanka supports Palestines application for admission as a full member of the United Nations.

President Abbas, recalling with his visits to Sri Lanka in 2008 and 2012, said that he was grateful to President Mahinda Rajapaksa who, as President of the Palestinian Solidarity Movement in Sri Lanka for over 35 years, identified very closely with the aspirations of the Palestinian people. He said that the Palestinian Foreign Relations Commission expressed solidarity with Sri Lanka during its war against terrorism and continues to support Sri Lanka strongly in all its initiatives after the achievement of peace.

He especially thanked Sri Lanka for its references to the cause of the Palestinian people at the session of the United Nations General Assembly every year and commented that the commitment contributed in substantial measure to the success which Palestine had achieved.

Prof. Peiris reiterated Sri Lanka's support for the two-State solution, based on successive resolutions of the United Nations, with emphasis on security of each States within its borders. President Abbas described the current issues with which the State of Palestine was grappling, including the building of settlements and issues connected with prisoners on hunger strike. On his part, Minister Peiris gave President Abbas a briefing on the challenges which Sri Lanka was facing after the eradication of terrorism and in particular current developments in the Human Rights Council.

Abbas and Peiris identified several fields appropriate for close collaboration between Sri Lanka and Palestine. This included mutual support in international fora, especially in the context of Sri Lanka's focus on strengthening bilateral relations with the Arab world. It was decided to build on four agreements already concluded between the two countries, in the areas of economic collaboration, political consultations, technical co-operation and the training of primary education teachers.

Dr. Riad Al-Malki, Minister of Foreign Affairs of the State of Palestine, with whom the visiting Sri Lankan Minister had a separate meeting, was present at the discussion at the President's Office.

For India and Lanka, consensus resolution may be best outcome

India may be hoping it will be adopted without a vote

NIRUPAMA SUBRAMANIANMarch 1, 2013

As a draft resolution on accountability in Sri Lanka does the rounds preparatory to being tabled by the United States in the current session of the Human Rights Council, the outcome that India may be hoping for most is that it will be adopted as a consensus document and no voting will be required.

That way, India will not need to take a position for or against the resolution. But it all depends on Sri Lanka. Though not in the 47-member HRC, Sri Lanka can lobby member countries for a vote, as it did in 2012.

This year though, there are indications that Colombo will not push for a vote. Unlike last year, it does not appear to be lobbying HRC member-states.

In March 2012, it seemed as if Sri Lanka was going more into a war than a U.N. session. There were anti-West and anti-resolution rallies on the streets of Colombo. The government shipped a huge media contingent to Geneva, along with a delegation of diplomats and politicians, all of whom kept the nationalist fires at home burning with their reports from ‘Ground Zero.’

But the tactic of turning the resolution into a do-or-die battle in which countries were seen as either “with us, or against us” failed. Sri Lanka lost the vote: 24 countries voted for the motion and 15 against, while eight countries abstained. The episode focussed much negative attention on the country, and created political embarrassment at home too.

No confrontation

This year, Sri Lanka may prefer a quieter outcome, even if a negative one. As it prepares to host the CHOGM summit in November this year, the last thing Colombo would want is one more confrontation with Western governments.

There are voices within the Commonwealth questioning if the meet should be held in Sri Lanka at all. Pulling it off in the teeth of opposition from powerful lobbies in Australia, Canada and Britain, would enable the Rajapaksa government to claim a huge victory and international legitimacy.

In any case, taking the resolution to a vote may not yield a different outcome from last year. Sri Lanka has provided no substantive reason to the countries that voted for the resolution in 2012, including India, to act differently this time.

In fact, with the change in the composition of the HRC, a vote may see fewer members on Sri Lanka’s side as some of its supporters last year, including China, are no longer in the Council.

Toning it down

On the other hand, if Colombo decides to let the resolution be adopted without a vote, it could engage with the resolution and work with member-states on its language. Despite Sri Lanka’s non-engagement last year, India worked hard to tone down the 2012 resolution. With political sentiment in Tamil Nadu running high, it may not do so this time.

A version of the draft is available with The Hindu. Though a resolution’s text is constantly revised and goes through several versions before being presented, the language this year is tougher and more wide-ranging.

The March 2012 document called on Sri Lanka to implement the recommendations of the Lessons Learnt and Reconciliation Committee (LLRC).

This year’s draft expresses concern in the preamble that Sri Lanka’s National Action Plan, which sets out a timetable for acting on LLRC’s recommendations, ‘does not adequately address’ all findings of the Commission.

CJ impeachment

More significantly, it casts a wide net to cover other developments in Sri Lanka. It expresses concern at the “threats to judicial independence and the rule of law,” a clear reference to the controversial impeachment of Chief Justice Shiranee Bandaranayake.

It also brings up the Rajapaksa government’s failure to “fulfil public commitments, including on devolution of political authority to provinces as called for in Sri Lanka’s Constitution,” a reference to the delay in holding elections in the Northern Province.

In the operative part of the resolution, it urges the Sri Lankan government to “formally respond to outstanding requests, including by providing unfettered access” to the U.N.-mandated Special Rapporteurs on independence of lawyers and judges; torture; freedom of expression, association and assembly; extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions; and to a working group on enforced or involuntary disappearances.

The draft also ‘welcomes’ the report of the High Commissioner for Human Rights, Navi Pillay, on the human rights situation in Sri Lanka. The Rajapaksa government has attacked Ms. Pillay for exceeding her mandate and producing an evaluation of Sri Lanka’s human rights situation instead of presenting, as the 2012 resolution mandated her, a report on assistance provided to Sri Lanka by the High Commission to implement the LLRC’s recommendations.

Consequences Of Rajapaksa Chairing Commonwealth Until 2015

By Peter Kellner -March 2, 2013 

Peter Kellner

The next CHOGM – the bi‐ennial Commonwealth Heads of Government meeting – is due to take place in Colombo later this year. In accordance with past practice, Sri Lanka’s President will then be chair‐in‐office of the Commonwealth until the following CHOGM in 2015. I wish to discuss the consequences of this. My starting point is the Harare Declaration agreed by CHOGM in 1991. This reasserted the commitment of the Commonwealth to “fundamental human rights” and “the liberty of the individual under the law”. At the heart of my case is the simple proposition that these rights are not only fundamental; they are indivisible. In practice, of course, every country falls short from time to time. The issue is the commitment of governments and the leaders of civil society to the principles of human rights.

This is why it is so disturbing that so many outside governments, intergovernmental and non‐governmental bodies have voiced strong criticism in recent times of Sri Lanka’s human rights record – including the United Nations Commissioner for Human Rights, the European Union, Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch. At this very moment, the United Nations Human Rights Council is meeting in Geneva to discuss the issue.

These criticisms cannot be ignored – least of all as we approach the coming CHOGM meeting. I see three options.

1. Sri Lanka’s Government satisfies reasonable people elsewhere in the world that it is committed to human rights. It seems to me that this requires, as a minimum,

a) Meeting the specific proposals of the UNs’ Human Rights Commissioner for new laws and practices to strengthen human rights and defend the independence of the judiciary and other national institutions; and

b) Working with the UN or some other international organisation to establish a truly independent mechanism to investigate allegations of serious violations of human rights

2. Sri Lanka’s government declines to do these things and, as a result, this year’s CHOGM is either cancelled or moved to another Commonwealth country.

3. Sri Lanka’s government declines to do these things but CHOGM still goes ahead in Colombo amid widespread criticism that the Commonwealth is ignoring its own principles.

To my mind, the only one of these outcomes that can strengthen the Commonwealth is Option 1. I believe that Option 2 would be unfortunate, and Option 3 a disaster. That is why I have been arguing for some months, and say to you today, that we should work as hard as we can for option 1. Do not work for the immediate overthrow of the Government or the condemnation of the President or the division of the country. Show the world that you truly wish to live in harmony in a democracy that respects human rights and the diversity of your beautiful country.

There is still time left, although not much, to press Sri Lanka’s government to change its ways.

However, if – and only if – that effort, sincerely made, ends in failure, the case for pursuing option 2 rather than option 3 would be compelling. Far better for the Commonwealth to abandon plans to meet in Colombo than to abandon the principles enshrined in the Harare Declaration.

But that is only part of my message to you. I return to my proposition that human rights are fundamental and indivisible. A number of critics of Sri Lanka’s human rights record have also pointed out that the war has left much unfinished business.

As the United Nations Secretary‐General’s Panel of Experts pointed out in April 2011, “there are credible allegations which, if proven, indicate that a wide range of violations of international humanitarian law and international human rights law was committed both by the Government of Sri Lanka and the LTTE” [the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam].

If there is to be an independent investigation of human rights abuses, it must embrace ALL such credible allegations. Both sides must be willing to co‐operate both in establishing the truth and in yielding up those who should face trial. It may be that, by negotiation, charges are levelled against only those accused of the worst atrocities, and that others should benefit from an amnesty as part of an agreed process of truth and reconciliation. But this should be done through negotiation and apply equally to both sides.

Let me say one more thing. As you know, Sri Lanka’s Government says the Global Tamil Forum and theBritish Tamil Forum, and I use the Government’s own words, “work hand‐in‐hand to pursue the terrorist objectives of LTTE, by misleading the public while hiding their true identities.”

You need to combat that charge. And words are not enough. Just as Sri Lanka’s Government must demonstrate by its deeds its commitment to human rights, so must you. Forty years ago, the Commonwealth inspired me by the lead it took in the struggle against apartheid in South Africa. To me, that struggle was not about black versus white, or even the majority against a minority. It was a battle for justice and human rights for all. Likewise, to me, the issue facing the Commonwealth is not of the Tamil people versus the Sinhalese people, or the Global Tamil Forum against the Government. It, too, is about justice and human rights for all.

My hope is that the next few weeks will see decisive action to win that battle, and to allow CHOGM to go ahead in Colombo in a way that demonstrates the very best of Commonwealth values. Much of that action must be taken by Sri Lanka’s government – but you in the Global Tamil Forum also have your responsibility to demonstrate your commitment to those values.

*Speech by Peter Kellner, Chairman of the Royal Commonwealth Society, to the Global Tamil Forum, London, February 27, 2013

US to move resolution on Sri Lanka over alleged war crimes during UN Human Rights Council

 March 02, 2013 

The US is set to move a new resolution against Sri Lanka at the current session of the United Nations Human Rights Council (UNHRC) for its alleged war crimes, asking the island nation to promote reconciliation and accountability.

"The resolution will ask the Government of Sri Lanka to follow through on its own commitments to its people, including implementing the constructive recommendations from the report by Sri Lanka's Lessons Learnt and Reconciliation Commission," State Department spokesman Patrick Ventrell said.

The US had introduced a similar resolution last year. "It will build on the 2012 resolution, which called on Sri Lanka to do more to promote reconciliation and accountability," he said.

Meanwhile, the United Nations Secretary General, Ban Ki-moon in Geneva told reporters that he has consistently underlined the critical importance of addressing accountability in Sri Lanka through a genuine and comprehensive national process achieving national reconciliation.

"Last week in New York I have received the Japanese ambassador who led the accountability assessment mission to Sri Lanka where representatives of Bangladesh, Nigeria, Rumania, Sri Lanka and a Colombia University professor participated in an observation project to Sri Lanka last December," he said at a news conference.

"I highlighted the importance for the Government of Sri Lanka to work constructively with the international community towards that end," he  said.

As the US and UN voiced their concern over human rights situation in the country, the Standard & Poor's Ratings Services yesterday affirmed its 'B+' long-term and 'B' short-term sovereign credit ratings on Sri Lanka.

"We affirmed the ratings to reflect our view of Sri Lanka's weak external liquidity, a moderately high and increasing net external liability position. Political institutions that lack transparency and independence are a further rating weakness," it said.

US tells Sri Lanka is ‘NATO’

• Germany defends Navi Pillay against Mahinda Samarasinghe’s remarks
• In a fresh salvo, the US criticises Sri Lanka for ‘lack of genuine’ action on reconciliation and accountability
• US expresses concern about undermining of judicial independence and rule of law in SL

By Dharisha Bastians- March 2, 2013  |
No-Action-Talk-Only (NATO) appeared to be the underlining criticism against Sri Lanka when the US fired a fresh salvo on Thursday at the ongoing UN Human Rights Council (UNHCR) sessions.

The US rapped Sri Lanka for a lack of genuine action on the part of the Sri Lankan Government to address reconciliation issues and investigate allegations of war crimes, and expressed concern about recent attempts to undermine judicial independence in the country.
In the strongest criticism of Sri Lanka’s post war progress yet by the US since the UN Human Rights Council’s 22nd Session commenced on Monday (25), the US Delegation to the UN in Geneva said Sri Lanka must promptly implement the constructive recommendations of its own Lessons Learned and Reconciliation Commission.
Echoing sentiments expressed by UN High Commissioner for Human Rights Navi Pillay in her report to the Council on Sri Lanka’s human rights situation, the US Delegation said it shared the High Commissioner’s “concerns about the Government’s lack of genuine action on these issues as well as its recent efforts to undermine the independence of the Judiciary and the rule of law.”
The US Delegation was addressing the Council during General Debate regarding the annual report presented by High Commissioner Pillay on Thursday.
“Sri Lanka must address accountability for violations of international law and investigate allegations of war crimes,” the US Delegation said. The US said it was imperative to promote reconciliation and accountability through transitional justice when conflicts end.
“We stand ready with OHCHR to help Sri Lanka address outstanding issues related to reconciliation, democratic governance and accountability,” the US Delegation noted.
Meanwhile, speaking at the Interactive Dialogue with High Commissioner Pillay, Germany hit back at remarks by Sri Lankan Head of Delegation Minister Mahinda Samarasinghe, saying the High Commissioner and her team were being subject to “unjustified criticism.”
German Ambassador and Permanent Representative to the UN in Geneva Hanns H. Schumacher told High Commissioner Pillay that it was his impression that she was “personally and increasingly subject to unfair criticism.” He said that the statement delivered during Wednesday’s High Level Segment by Cabinet Minister Samarasinghe from Sri Lanka was an illustration of his point.

• UNP urges Govt. to reduce cost of living
• Bodu Bala Sena storms Dematagoda ‘slaughterhouse’
• TNA welcomes screening of film; wants ongoing violations stopped
• Eminent UK jurist finds ex-CJ Shirani innocent

“Madam High Commissioner, your matter of fact but well founded presentation remains silent on the difficult circumstances in which your team and yourself have to do your work and on the extent also to which you are personally, and according to my own impression, increasingly faced with unjustified criticism,” Ambassador Schumacher said.

Rani’s Story: A Story Of Sri Lanka’s Torture And Gang-Raping

By Roma Tearne -March 2, 2013

Roma Tearne

The place has been difficult to find and I am late.

‘I’m sorry,’ I say.

And then I hand her the bunch of flowers bought on impulse. It is an unremarkable day in February. The sun does not shine and the damp air threatens rain. I have travelled up to London for this interview but at the station I hesitated, then bought some hyacinths.

The girl I am about to talk to, Rani, is twenty-six, and because I too am Sri Lankan I am interested in her story. But still, I must admit, I have been dreading this meeting. For I am neither journalist nor councillor, lawyer or doctor and I have no experience of interviewing someone who has endured what she has. So, as an uncertain gift, a token of respect, I have brought her flowers, blue as a tropical sky, scented like the air of her lost childhood. I hold them out and instantly see, even before she says a word, a desolation in her face. She is detached from her surroundings, muffled, in some way. The interview room is small. A low bed, an empty desk, a blank computer screen. No plants, no pictures on the walls, nothing personal. When I came in I noticed a row of grey socks drying on a radiator. A faint trace of incense hovers suggesting prayers. I am aware of listeners behind closed doors.

            ‘Tell me,’ I say, dismissing all thoughts of where I might be, ‘start at the beginning.’

But she cannot. Like all memories hers arrives in fragments, in vivid shards, hesitant flashbacks relived again and again in the retelling.

            ‘They killed them,’ she says, and I wait.

Once they had been six. Now Rani is just one. Alone; the emblematic story of the destruction of Tamil families.

            ‘On the ninth day of the seventh month last year,’ she tells me, closing her eyes, arms wrapped around herself, ‘my aunt rang me. She told me they had set my home on fire. She told me my mother and sister had been burnt alive. When I went back all that was left was their skeletons.’

The statement lies between us in a shock of silence. She has started with the thing upmost in her mind. Outside on the busy north London road a siren rises and falls, then fades into nothing.

Rani’s story is medieval in its savage retribution. It is a story of innocence, idealism, and betrayal in a time of civil war. One that is repeated again and again in Sri Lanka. To its shame the country has collectively mastered the art of camouflaging its horrendous crimes, bussing in western tourists to its golden beaches and fronting a campaign of faux-peace. So that the world with its limited attention span, its short supply of pity, turns a blind eye. In the glossy brochures and magazines of the west Sri Lanka is called the ‘Number One Holiday In Paradise.’                                     Read More

JVP frowns on  ‘militarised’ Principals

By Dasun Edirisinghe-February 28, 2013

A JVP affiliated education sector union yesterday condemned principals and education administrative officials who had accepted military ranks and said if the government wanted to give management training to them there were several state institutions whose services could be obtained for that purpose.

General Secretary of the Ceylon Teachers’ Service Union (CTSU) Mahinda Jayasinghe told The Island that some principals wanted to flaunt their military ranks.

According to the government programme of commissioning school principals and education administrative service officials as Brevet Colonels, more than 4,000 had been called for interviews for the second batch to be commissioned, he said.

Jayasinghe said that under the first batch, 23 persons had been commissioned as Brevet Colonels, including an Additional Secretary to the Ministry of Education, the Commissioner General of Educational Publications and 21 Principals of leading schools around the country.

They had been called for a training in the National Cadet Corps again, he said.

"After getting the ranks some principals have the audacity to paste their photos in military uniform in several places in schools," he said.

The trade unionist said that if there was a need to give management training

to principals there were several government institutions, including the Management Training Institute at Meepe and the Sri Lanka Institute of Development Administration, but the government select military training instead.

Due to the military programme the cordial relationship between the principals and schoolchildren would be ruined, Jayasinghe said.

Need to promote local traders. Saravanabawan MP notify at Karavetti Divisional Coordination Committee meeting.

Local traders should be encouraged in our region. They should not at all get affected was said by Jaffna district parliament member E.Saravanabawan.

Jaffna district parliament member Sil Vesiri Alenrin chaired the Coordination Committee meeting held at Karavetti divisional secretariat conference hall two days back Thursday.

While addressing at the meeting he said, traders from outside districts coming in should be prevented. Our traders by acquiring loans are investing on business. They are facing difficulties to settle their loans. They should be encouraged.

Traders visiting our regions temporarily are bringing partially manufactured items from the Colombo factories which are subject to low quality and are selling here.  They should be prevented and our local vendors should be encouraged, Saravanabawan said.

The difficulties faced to carry out the developments at the Udupitti Co-operative Societies was described by the Co-operative society Chairman S.Nagalingam, and the necessary assistance to acquire towards this, parliament member E.Saravanabawan gave the assurance. He requested the Society Chairman to contact him concerning this.

Nelliyadi Traders Union Chairman S.Agiladas in his address said, our society has provided electric bulbs worth of millions of rupees to fix for the Nelliyadi town. Whenever it gets damaged, we are carrying out maintenance work.

We frequently provide financial assistance to the people’s welfare projects organized by the military and police and local public movements. In this state, by permitting outside mobile traders, we the local vendors are affected drastically.

Therefore we appeal a prohibition in this region for outside traders business transactions should be imposed.

The meeting was attended by Karavetti divisional council Chairman P.Vivek and divisional council members, including many department officials 

Saturday , 02 March 2013

Reconciliation: The principal Recommendations I Sent To The President

By Rajiva Wijesinha -March 2, 2013

Prof Rajiva Wijesinha

Recommendations as to Conceptual and Administrative Issues to promote Reconciliation

The principal recommendations I sent to the President were based on 70 meetings over the year of District and Divisional Secretariat Reconciliation Committees. Two meetings were held in every Divisional Secretariat in the North, excluding the Jaffna District, where four meetings were held altogether. There were 20 meetings in Divisional Secretariats in the East, in addition to meetings at District Secretariats and with the Governors of the North and East, who were  extremely helpful.

I also sent some other recommendations related to issues raised at the various meetings of stakeholders that took place in my Colombo office. The most significant of these was the working group to prepare a National Policy on Reconciliation, set up following a discussion on Reconciliation initiated by the Consortium of Humanitarian Agencies. The group was multi-ethnic and multi-religious and included representatives of other political parties as well as Civil Society.

The initial draft was discussed at length with representatives of several political parties. They recommended consulting religious leaders and media and Civil Society personnel, after which a final draft was sent to the President.

The draft was welcomed by the various groups that participated in consultations related to Reconciliation. These included

1. Civil Society Partners for Reconciliation – Governmental and Non-Governmental Organizations which have worked towards reconciliation, along with diplomatic missions that have contributed actively to government approaches to reconciliation. Needs that emerged at Divisional Secretariat meetings and elsewhere were sometimes met by participants.

2. Religion, Education And Pluralism

Representatives of all major religions practiced in Sri Lanka, who described interventions they had engaged in to promote fellow feeling and suggested ways of developing linkages. They sent the President a proposal about helping with teacher training in areas where shortages cause problems that inhibit communication across communities.

3. Reconciliation Youth Forum

A group of young people anxious to promote reconciliation who  set up a blog which covers a number of initiatives in the field – www.reconciliationyouthforum.com

4. I also ran a discussion group intended to bring younger officials from the forces and the Ministry of External Affairs together with parliamentarians and Civil Society, to focus on issues that might hinder the reconciliation process. The Ministry could not send participants, but the military personnel participated actively and intelligently. They introduced some new ideas which I was able to use in speaking on Reconciliation both in Sri Lanka and abroad.

Based on such discussions, I sent in the following Recommendations

5. Cabinet should adopt the draft National Policy on Reconciliation and use it as a framework for initiatives in pursuit of the LLRC Action Plan, as well as other national goals, in terms of Sri Lankan needs and aspirations.

6. A Ministry for Reconciliation should be created under a senior Minister who commands confidence. If Reconciliation is to remain under the President, it should be through a Ministry, with an experienced Deputy and a competent Secretary.

7. A better media strategy is needed to convey information about positive initiatives, and also correct misconceptions and misinformation.

8. Mechanisms should be developed for using the expertise of Religious and other Civil Society Organizations to bring youngsters together and develop sustainable and productive links.

9. Such organizations can also contribute significantly to language teaching and language learning, and regulations should be formulated to encourage this.

10. The armed forces have a significant role to play with regard to Reconciliation, but mechanisms must be developed to ensure that this is done through civilian structures, without losing the efficiency that has characterized their interventions to support Resettlement and Rehabilitation. 

The website President Putin doesn't want you to see Saturday, 02 March 2013  On Monday - the one-year anniversary of Pussy Riot's arrest - we're headed to the Russian Embassy with a special delivery of our Pussy Riot world map. We're honestly not sure how the Russian authorities are going to react to our Pussy Riot world map. The Russian authorities recently banned Pussy Riot's videos as "extremist". And last August, the Russian Embassy in Washington tossed Amnesty's petitions to the curb - literally - and refused to hear our concerns about human rights in Russia. But on March 4, the one-year anniversary of Pussy Riot's arrest, we will not be silent. Two Pussy Riot members, Maria "Masha" Alyokhina and Nadezhda "Nadya" Tolokonnikova, remain behind bars in notoriously brutal prison camps. Last Wednesday we danced outside the Russian Embassy to commemorate Pussy Riot's We only have a few more days left to add as many names as possible to our map. Stand for Pussy Riot and free speech in Russia -- get on the map! It's been a whirlwind year since Pussy Riot's iconic "punk prayer" performance at Christ the Saviour Cathedral in Moscow. Arrests, courtrooms, lawyers, political posturing by the Russian authorities and President Putin -- all culminating in Masha and Nadya's outlandishly harsh two-year sentences, at prison camps far from their families and young children. But the women of Pussy Riot were never alone. From Twitter to rock shows to handwritten letters, hundreds of thousands have called on the Russian authorities to #FreePussyRiot. More than 100 of Russia's best-known actors, directors and musicians signed a letter calling for their release. Madonna played a Moscow concert with "Pussy Riot" emblazoned across her back. Amnesty activists threw a full-fledged punk concert steps from the Russian Embassy in Washington DC. Star musicians like Sting and Anti-Flag added their names to our Pussy Riot world map in solidarity -- along with thousands of other activists like you. One year later, Pussy Riot needs us to speak out -- more than ever. Why now? Because Pussy Riot continues to be a symbol of the Russian authorities' unreasonable crackdown on freedom of expression in Russia -- and the attacks on free speech in Russia are only getting worse with some disturbing new laws. Did you know that: Conducting public protests in Russia could cost you up to U.S. $32,000 in fines? Human rights and political activism could potentially be treated as "treason" in Russia, thanks to a broad new legal definition? Foreign and domestic NGOs -- including those doing vital human rights work -- face increasingly severe restrictions on their operations in Russia? Pussy Riot's harsh prison sentences are a draconian response to peaceful dissent. "This is cruelty on purpose, cruelty for propaganda purposes," said Ekaterina Samutsevich, a member of Pussy Riot who was arrested with Nadya and Masha but later conditionally released on appeal. "...We need to fight it somehow." And fight it we will! We will never give up our campaign to defend human rights and free speech in Russia. On Monday, we'll be headed to the Russian Embassy, map in hand. -Amnesty International USA- In the Defence Sector Opacity as a security threat

2013-03-02  Opacity in the defence sector is a security threat itself. It is self-defeating as unjust enrichment of few demoralizes many within the sector. Based on data from the World Bank and the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI), Transparency International (TI) estimates that the global cost of corruption in the defence sector to be a minimum of US$ 20 billion per year. This equates to the total sum pledged by the G8 nations in 2009 to fight world hunger. The total amount involved is only an indicator of how much it could undermine the public trust vested with the sector. If powerful segments within the military could act with impunity, it poses a large threat to the security of the people in the country. This is a living truth for a multi-ethnic country like Sri Lanka where Tamil minorities feel controlled in many ways by the war-winning government. The recent ranking conducted by Transparency International UK branded 82 countries in the world based on five risks areas: political, personnel, procurement, finance and operations. Each of these corruption risk areas were analyzed based on a number of sub categories. For example the corruption risk area of finance was analyzed based on asset disposal, secret budgets, military owned businesses and illegal private enterprises; the risk area of personnel was analyzed by taking into consideration leadership behaviour, payroll, promotions, appointments, rewards, conscription, salary chain, values, standards and small bribes. The whole analysis placed countries under six brands, 'the Brand 'A' being the least corrupt to Brand 'E', recognizing the most corrupt.' Disappointing Unfortunately, only two countries in the world are ranked within the coveted Brand 'A'. Many countries, statistically 69% out of 82 countries, are categorized under Brand, 'D', 'E' or 'F'. The countries in this 69% include 20 of the largest 30 arms importers in the world and 16 of the largest 30 arms exporters included in the study. Therefore, the results are disappointing. It indicates that defence risks in most countries are poorly controlled with corresponding high vulnerability to corruption. Sri Lanka is ranked within the 'E' category signifying a 'Very High' level of corruption risk within the sector. Over the years, there is a low institutional political activity to stem corruption in the national defence and security establishment. There was much political interference which undermined the impartiality and independence of the Bribery Commission of Sri Lanka. The President enjoys a strong control over the State Intelligence. Overall, the strong presidential system centred on the President's family, creating an executive power that undermines the potential for effective scrutiny or transparency, limits any kind of open discussion about the sector. In the field of finance, Sri Lanka shows no transparency on asset disposals or on information classification. The latter is connected to the risk of being overly centralized following a history of Emergency Regulations. There is no detail of money spent on secret items while the financial regulations of the government enable 'secret payments' that are effective only under presidential control. Meanwhile, the defence sector's development of commercial business in the post-war period has been extensive and faces the amalgamation of UDA with the defence budget, worsening the risks. In the field of personnel corruption risk, whistle-blowing is considered potentially treacherous in Sri Lanka. The President wields control over recruitment of personnel at the most senior levels, and there is a high risk of favouritism and politicization in recruitment processes at other senior levels. While pay-rates of personnel are lacking in transparency, on a more positive note, the pay system is evidently robust: there is no indication of ghost soldiers on the military payroll or of untimely pay. It is unclear if a Code of Conduct exists and prosecutions for disciplinary matters are vulnerable to politicization. The problem of facilitation payments is reported to be widespread. With regard to operations-related corruption risks, there is no codified military doctrine in which anti-corruption provisions are covered, and acts pertaining to the armed services do not include anti-corruption aspects either. There is no evidence of anti-corruption training, monitoring, or guidelines on contracting that relate to operations. There is a lack of transparency regarding the extent of the operations of Private Military Contractors (PMCs) and whether they are regulated or scrutinized. Procurement corruption Finally, in the field of procurement-related corruption risk it is noted that the Joint Operations Headquarters under the Ministry of Defence (MoD) is responsible for procurement, but legislation is not public and has limited application under the official remit of 'national security'. There is little or no transparency on purchases, pre-bid standards for companies to meet, or on a strategy guiding procurement (if one exists). In terms of competition in defence procurement, the principle of open competition is likely to be undermined in practice, while tender boards or anti-collusion efforts are lacking in effectiveness. There is no transparency at all regarding control of agents or sub-contractors, or financing packages. Finally, political factors are assessed to influence defence procurement. Overall, Sri Lankan defence sector supported with public money is largely challenged with many corruption risks. This is an uneasy subject to deal with. It is possible for those who raise these issues to be branded a traitor, but it is true patriotism that makes the critical mass to raise these issues, in good faith, on behalf of the citizenry.