British HC defends UK govt. members attending GTF conference

Saturday, 09 March 2013 

The British High Commission yesterday said that the participation of senior government members at the recently concluded third anniversary conference of the Global Tamil Forum (GTF) in the House of Commons shouldn’t be considered as an endorsement of "every policy position taken by the host or partner organization."

A spokesman for the British High Commission was responding to a query by The Island whether Deputy Premier Nick Clegg and Conservative Party Chairman Grant Shapps participation meant the British government supported the GTF’s call to shift Commonwealth Heads of Government Meeting (CHOGM) from Sri Lanka.

Ministers regularly attended various community events hosted in Parliament to demonstrate their support for those communities as well as recognize their contribution to the UK, the spokesperson said.

In the run-up to the GTF conference on Feb 27, the Sri Lankan government told the Foreign and Commonwealth Office that participation of UK government members would be detrimental to ongoing national reconstruction and reconciliation efforts.

Asked whether the ruling coalition comprising Conservatives and Liberal Democrats had approved the GTF conference in the House of Commons, the spokesperson said that the grouping had the support of the All Party Parliamentary Group for Tamils (APPG-T). The official said that APPG-T didn’t form part of the government therefore its participation didn’t reflect British support for the GTF.

A senior GoSL official alleged that APPG-T had been working closely with the GTF for some time, while recalling the circumstances under which Vice Chair of the grouping recommended the production team responsible for Sri Lanka’s Killing Fields for Nobel Peace prize last year.

Commenting on the forthcoming CHOGM, the official said: "As the UK has repeatedly stated, we have not yet decided on the level of any attendance at CHOGM, but we will be looking to Sri Lanka, as we would any host, to demonstrate its commitment to upholding Commonwealth values. The UK has consistently called for an independent, thorough and credible investigation into the allegations of war crimes. We believe that the process of reconciliation between Sri Lanka’s communities has a greater chance of success if investigations are Sri Lankan led rather than externally imposed. We will continue to work with international partners to support the Sri Lankan people in their pursuit of enduring peace and reconciliation, including with the assistance of relevant international organizations."

Asked why the Chilcot Inquiry decided to further delay the final report, the official said: "The Inquiry into the Iraq War, led by Sir John Chilcot, is independent of government. In his most recent letter to the Prime Minister in July of 2012, Sir John said that the Inquiry would present its report once any witnesses facing potential criticism have had the chance to respond and present their case. This process is due to begin around the middle of 2013."

By Shamindra Ferdinando

No need to visit Colombo to cater information to UN. Spokesperson notifies.

If any problem arise for the Tamils living in the north of Sri Lanka if they desire to give information to UN, there is, no need for them to go to Colombo. There are other ways to contact the UN was said by UN spokesperson located in New York.

 

Hundreds of Tamils from north wanted to handover an entreaty to the UN representatives located in Colombo, but they were prevented at Vavuniya was a news item published and such statement was made.

 

If they require catering any information to UN, there are different methods. If they cannot journey to Colombo, they should make use of it was said by UN Spokesperson Martin Nesriki located in New York

 

To handover a supplication to the UN headquarters located in Colombo and to attend the protest rally in Colombo appealing   to find their relatives gone missing, many northern Tamil people wanted to attend the protest were obstructed by police at Vavuniya.

 

Tamil people from Vavuniya, Mannar and many areas made arrangements for their journey in ten buses to travel to Colombo but they were obstructed by police.

 

Police said, they had received information that they would be under attack while preceding their journey towards Colombo hence they prevented.

 

Sri Lanka constitution and international laws permit to express opinions freely. Hence Sri Lanka government cannot obstruct but should permit was a statement issued by the American Embassy located in Colombo.

 

By introducing a resolution at the Geneva UN Human Rights Council, to establish this rights, US is functioning with international associated countries was further notified by the Embassy.

 

If any information is required to cater to UN, there are other methods. If not able to visit Colombo, should make use of it was said.

Saturday , 09 March 2013

Video: Rebuilding Sri Lanka – Former Child Soldier Niromi And Gordon Weiss

On The World, Jane Hutcheon discusses the process of reconciliation in Sri Lanka with former UN spokesman Gordon Weiss and former child soldier Niromi De Soyza.

Watch here the  ABC News interview-March 9, 2013 

Time To Face The Music In Geneva!

By Malinda Seneviratne -March 9, 2013 

Malinda Seneviratne

A few weeks ago, the word from Delhi on US-sponsored resolution on Sri Lanka the UNHRC Sessions in Geneva was ‘yes’.  Let us translate: ‘Yes, we will vote ‘yes’ on the resolution’.  No surprises there because a) India voted ‘yes’ in 2012, and b) India is India (read ‘Not Sri Lanka’s friend) and c) this is an INDIAN Resolution, an INDIAN doosra although it is being delivered by the USA.

The latest though is that India is ‘undecided’.  Now, in diplomatic circles, this indecision would be correctly read as evidence that the main protagonist is trying to extract the maximum juice from the Sri Lankan orange while not appearing to be anywhere near the fruit.

Delhi has a problem.  It is called ‘Tamil Nadu’.  No, it is not Tamil Nationalism, which has been safely offshored to Sri Lanka.  It is about elections and related arithmetic.  It’s a political reality that figured in the calculations of all Indian political leaders.  So Delhi needs to ‘deliver’ something that’s at least halfway sweet to Jayalalithaa.  On the other hand Delhi has to do this without appearing to be the bad guy that Delhi is because that might constitute the last brick in the Great Wall of China that India is building. So Geneva 2013 would ideally (for India) end  with Sri Lanka agreeing to India’s ‘solution’ (plus some other benefits, just like theIndo-Lanka Accord was not just about sorting an ‘ethnic’ conflict) for the price of the resolution being ‘watered down’ or even withdrawn (by the USA, not India, of course!).

Sri Lanka’s main strength at this point is the fact that it is weak.  In other words Sri Lanka is in ‘Nothing to Lose Land’.  There’s no way that the Government can agree to India’s proposal (a re-hashing of the various Eelam proposals or Interim Eelam proposals) and still hope to retain popularity among all ethnic groups.

Equal rights by definition cannot exclude anyone.  A 13A Plus, in the way India envisages, would concretize an Eelamist myth regarding traditional homelands. That would threaten the Sinhalese.  That would exclude the Sinhalese.  Equal rights can be obtained in other ways and should be obtained too. Sri Lanka doesn’t need India’s permission or India’s recommendations on such matters.

We must recollect at this point that those who ruled India (either as whole or in part) have always attacked the Sinhalese; one remembers the Chola invasions and the tyrannies of the likes of Raja Raja and Magha.  Dr.Manmohan Singh is but a 21^st Century avatar of these gentlemen.

President Mahinda Rajapaksa observed recently, ‘Sri Lanka is like a volley ball; everyone is taking turns at punching it to cover up their sins’.  He did not elaborate, but here’s a list that ought to be read by whoever is negotiating defeat for Sri Lanka in Geneva:

We have the German SPD needing to cover up history of killing millions in the 20^th Century. We have the USA, wanting us to forget the monumental crimes against humanity in all parts of the world as well as against the First Nations in America and African Americans. We have Britain’s genocidal conduct in colonies and subsequent crimes against humanity as partner-in-crime of the USA. We have India and the Kashmir they want the world not to talk about.

The bottom line though is that given the amount of bucks and weapons of mass destruction these countries possess and given Sri Lanka’s poverties in these respects, the ‘cover up’ will continue.  But since Sri Lanka can only be expected to be goaded to sign agreements against Sri Lanka’s interest, each one more pernicious than the ones that came before, this is as opportune a moment as any to call India’s bluff.

Sri Lanka can take the following position:

‘Go ahead.  Table the resolution. We’ll face the vote, we’ll face the music.  All we can do is do our best and we have.  We’ve done what you have not done, ever. Try rescuing 300,000 people held hostage by the Al Qaeda (or by the US Marines), trying feeding them 3 meals a day.  Try thinking about releasing over 10,000 terrorists after rehabilitation.  Stop. Don’t even try. You cannot.  So let’s cut to the chase.  Let’s take the vote. We want to see who are friends are.  Ms. India, go ahead, vote.  We want to know where you stand, so that we can decided in which direction we should move.  Wait, did we hear someone mention China? Maybe we heard wrong. So, to get back to the point, vote.  We have little to lose, but even in defeat we would like to see the face of the enemy, we would like to know the names of those who did us in.  Simple. 

*Malinda Seneviratne is the Chief Editor of ‘The Nation and his articles can be found at www.malindawords.blogspot.com

US UNHRC inaction not inconsistent with saving Rajapakse in US Courts, says TAG

[TamilNet, Friday, 08 March 2013, 01:03 GMT]
The resolution tabled in the Geneva UNHCR sessions by the USA in concert with India, which sidesteps forcing an independent international investigation into the Mu’l’livaaykaal killings, and misleads the Eezham Tamils into a mirage that international community will seek accountability, appears entirely consistent with the intervention of the U.S. State Department in the legal actions pursued by Tamil plaintiffs against Sri Lanka’s President Rajapakse, legal sources in Washington said. U.S. is acting as a proxy to Rajapakses in filing legal briefs and replacing Patton Boggs as “the attorneys” for Rajapakse. 

“The U.S. State Department exercising the discretionary powers to intervene legally in the case against Rajapakse effectively blocks a pre-trial discovery process which would have uncovered facts related to the Sri Lanka killings. Therefore, this US intervention is not inconsistent with the resolution which does not call for an independent international investigation,” spokesperson for Tamils Against Genocide (TAG), a US-based activist organization that seeks legal redress to Tamil victims war, said.

United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia circuit has scheduled March 8th, 9:30 am for the oral argument in the appeal case against Sri Lanka’s President Mahinda Rajapakse for civil damages on war-crimes charges filed by three Tamil plaintiffs whose relatives were extra-judicially executed or unlawfully killed under the “command responsibility” of Rajapakse. 

United States Justice Department lawyers, under the direction from the State Department, will present the legal oral argument supporting immunity to Defendant-Appellee Rajapakse, legal sources in Washington said. Rajapakse appointed attorneys at Patton Boggs, a large law firm in Washington D.C. will concede their full allocagted time to the US Government to argue the case for Rajapakse, the procedural motions in the case docket indicated.

“The U.S. Government has affirmatively exercised its option, first in the trial court, and now in the appellate court, to intervene to save Rajapakse from legal action by legitimate victims of his allegedly murderous conduct. Ambassador Blake architected policy of appeasing Sri Lanka overlooking the killing more than 80,000 Tamil civilians in Mu’l’livaaykkaal, appears to have even trumped Sri Lanka’s continued dismissal of the chorus of disapproval from the West on autocracy-leaning governance matters in Colombo,” TAG spokesperson said in an earlier note to TamilNet.

BJP’s 2 yardsticks for conflicts: Army withdrawal desired in Sri Lanka, not Kashmir

Autonomy a dirty word here, welcome outside the country

KT NEWS SERVICENEW DELHI, March 8: Bhartiya Janta Party has exposed its dubious stand on militarized conflicts with party leader Yashwant Sinha spelling out a 7 point recipe to end Tamil crises in Sri Lanka, which is in striking contrast to the BJP stand on the issue of Kashmir.
Yashwant Sinha’s road map, spelt out during a debate in the Lok Sabha yesterday on the Sri Lankan crisis, however, almost resembles what Kashmir’s two mainstream parties NC and PDP demand for ending crises in Jammu and Kashmir. The same BJP opposes these proposals tooth and nail for Kashmir, while demanding them for Tamil dominated Northern Sri Lanka.
While the BJP opposes any demand for repeal of AFSPA or any attempt to reduce the footprint of the armed forces in Kashmir, Sinha has advocated complete withdrawal of Army from Northern Sri Lanka and handing over of law and order duties to the local police.
BJP calls for taking a stern stand on Kashmir without any concession to Kashmiris and has strongly voiced its opposition to the amnesty policy for surrendered militants. But Yashwant’s recipe for Sri Lanka includes suggestion for a Reconciliation Committee.
BJP has opposed tooth and nail any proposal for autonomy in the case of Kashmir and while in power at the centre even rejected the Farooq Abdullah government on autonomy for Jammu and Kashmir. The party has also voiced its reservations to any talk of restoration of pre-1952 status and instead calls for abrogation of Article 370 and complete integration of the state to the Union of India. However, the 7-point proposal for Sri Lanka springs a surprise with a suggestion for additional provisions in the existing laws to ensure full devolution of powers to Northern Sri Lanka.
Sinha has also advocated an independent and impartial enquiry comprising people from outside Sri Lanka to probe human rights abuses but the BJP is in complete denial of human rights abuse when it comes to Kashmir and opposes any talk of probing these cases as an “anti-national” act. In striking contrast, Sinha advocates a commitment from Sri Lankan government for punishing the guilty.
While BJP is one the strongest critics of any third party intervention in the Kashmir conflict, Sinha seeks a greater role for India in the Sri Lankan conflict resolution, calling for not just a vote at the UN Human Rights Council but also for a greater role in drafting the resolution itself. Interestingly, at the same time, he talks about warning other neighbourhood countries from interfering in the island country.
During his intervention in Lok Sabha, Yashwant Sinha’s seven-point road map included the following broad points:

1. Withdrawal of Army from Northern Sri Lanka and handing over law and order duties to local police.

2. Implementation of Lessons Learnt and Reconciliation Committee.

3. Implementation of not only 13th Amendment, but additional provisions to ensure full devolution of powers to Northern Sri Lanka
4. Institution of an independent and impartial enquiry comprising people from outside Sri Lanka to probe human rights abuses

5. Clear commitment that guilty shall be punished

6. India should not merely vote at the UN Human Rights Council, but take a lead in drafting resolution against Sri Lanka.

7. Let India convey other nations in neighbourhood not to interfere in affairs of Sri Lanka and Indo-Sri Lanka relations.

When White Is Black And Black Is White: The New Sri Lankan Reality

By Emil van der Poorten -March 9, 2013 

Emil van der Poorten

This column should, probably, have, as the last letter in its title, the word “nightmare” rather than “reality” because that is precisely the state this country has reached.

While I certainly do not, through personal experience of its history, subscribe to the view that the current Debacle of Asia was ever paradise on earth, I certainly remember a better time in its history – pre-S.W.R.D. Bandaranaikecertainly – when we seemed to have more than a fighting chance of fulfilling the promise of continuing to be the pre-eminent democracy in the region.

Warts and all, the Uncle Nephew Party of the Senanayakes, Kotelawelas and Jayewardenes practiced a brand of democracy to which the current pretense does not bear the slightest resemblance.

Yes, the elites, by and large governed and they constituted not much more than 10% of the island’s population. However, thanks to a sense of noblesse oblige or belief in the rule of law being absolute, the vicious violence that is the ruling reality did not exist. I distinctly remember the sense of horror with which many of us greeted the mysterious “suicide” of Dodampe Mudalali held in detention by the CID in their immediately-infamous 4th Floor. Particularly since the Che Guevara uprising of 1971, not a hundred, nay a thousand, Dodampe Mudalalis committing “suicide” would even merit mention on the back page of any of our tabloids or broadsheets today. Think about it, folks, even such a seemingly outlandish statement would hardly raise a ripple in our Land of a Thousand White Vans!

Apart from the White Van Disappearances that have become a dime-a-dozen in this country, we have a virtual procession of prisoners in custody hanging themselves with ingeniously constructed nooses while still others are taken into custody and then have to be shot “in self defence” while trying to escape on their way to revealing hidden caches of contraband, guns, ammunition or whatever. The stories that accompany these deaths verge on the hilarious either because of or in spite of their banality.

An interesting vignette is the story of the most recent major outbreak of violence at the Welikade prison. The media trumpeted the fact that they were on the scene throughout the conflict and that the pictures showed several prisoners armed with the automatic weapons they’d broken out of the prison armoury. To my recollection, there was only one prisoner in one picture that fitted this description and one could hardly be certain that the man appearing in the photograph was toting an automatic weapon in the first place!

Even if the entire Sri Lankan nation did not swallow this rather grim fairy tale hook line and sinker, I heard hardly a whimper from those who are constantly extolling the state of discourse and disputation that allegedly prevails in the Disaster of Asia today!

Now we hear that, leave alone hand over (yet another) of those famous “Reports to the President by a Commission of Inquiry” appointed by him, that report has been further delayed. Surprised? If you are and you are an Eskimo from Anchorage, I’d like to sell you a very large refrigerator!

In any event, even IF this great and, I am sure, revelatory Report is handed over to our reigning monarch (or one of his siblings or progeny who are his heirs) I wouldn’t exactly, as the saying goes, bet the family farm that it will EVER see the light of day. After all, it doesn’t take the genius of an Einstein to anticipate that future behavior invariably follows past patterns of conduct!

I have tried to inject a modicum of humour, if not wit, into what I have written up to now and if it comes across as laboured, I crave your indulgence because it is certainly not easy to adopt a jocular tone with regard to matters that are, literally, those of life and death.

A colleague for whose skills and integrity I have nothing but absolute admiration, described our Monarch as viewing the world from an upside-down position. That was being kind because it suggested simple misapplication of one’s faculties. To me the facts suggest otherwise. They suggest, in that old but nevertheless appropriate phrase, Hannah Arendt’s old phrase – the banality of evil.

None of what is happening in this country that should cause absolute revulsion in any civilized society and certainly in an allegedly Buddhist one, can be described as accidental. All of it flows from a culture deliberately created by those who rule this land with an iron fist.

The rapes, the gangland killings, the brutality that exceeds the bestial doesn’t happen in a vacuum. It happens in a culture that either actively or passively encourages it. The Caligulas of this world didn’t simply pop out of the ground like some exotic and unique bimmal/hathu (mushrooms to those unfamiliar with the Sinhala language). As aberrant as the behaviour of such monsters was, they were a creation of the culture and civilization that spawned them.

That the violence and cruelty that was a day-to-day reality in this country for nigh on three decades certainly conditioned a nation into an acceptance of this horror is inarguable. However, I don’t recall ANY nation that endured the horrors of the worst conflict of its kind in the history of the world – World War II – having what we are experiencing in epidemic proportions in this land that claims to be the epicentre of Buddhist culture and civilization. Not even the fact that we are governed, overall, by those who conduct themselves as dictated to by the occult explains what this country is currently experiencing.

If ever there was an occasion when the seemingly simplistic “Those who are not with us are against us” bears application, this is it.

Are you for the violence and corruption and cruelty that assail Sri Lanka today or are you against it?

More important, if you are against it, what are your prepared to do about the horror that threatens to engulf all of us?

INDIA: The nemesis of a resolution

March 8, 2013

The US sponsored resolution against neighbouring Sri Lanka has become a discussion point in India. Debates in the parliament and in the media are about whether Indiashould support or oppose the resolution. Government of India has not decided yet, though some politicians, including the main opposition party, the BJP, have been demanding that India should support the resolution. Everyone understands that these calls, to support the resolution, however is with the narrow view of gaining a few more votes from Tamil Nadu and has nothing to do with respect of justice and reparation.

Mr. D. Raja, a politician from Tamil Nadu who participated in a televised debate yesterday on the issue does not even know the name of the body in which the resolution is mootedat the UN. Yet he spared no breath to yell at other participants and the moderator, 'that India must support the resolution, even if the government does not know what its content is.' Raja behaved as if he expects the Government of India to act like his party cadres, toagree whatever the politburo decides.

For those who are yet to read the text of the resolution as it stands now, the same isavailable here. Said that, the government is fully aware of the resolution, its contents, and its wording is one of the concerns for the government.

Irrespective of India's position on the resolution, it will succeed at the UN. Abstention or opposition would place the country in the bad side of history, that the Government of Sri Lanka itself is not actively contesting it, domestically and internationally. The resolutionwould however make no difference to situation in Sri Lanka. The Government of Sri Lanka has today the proven record of accomplishments of a rouge regime and is least bothered about what the international community speaks or thinks about it.

The incumbent government in Sri Lanka inherited a country that has a devastated justice system. Its public institutions had already lost independence and efficacy, which President Mahinda Rajapaksa's government has used well in pursuit of 'happiness' atthe Temple Trees and all those who are well connected with the Rajapaksa family. Thelatest victim is the former Chief Justice of Sri Lanka, who herself was the product of afallen and deeply corrupt legal order. A UN resolution will be the last worry for Rajapaksa, that his family has consolidated power in the country.

The myopic view of the world Tamil forum also has reasonably helped in the process ofthe Rajapaksa family considering power. For instance when the Chief Justice of Sri Lanka was illegally removed from office, which the government termed impeachment,there was no Tamil voice that joined the protest. The Tamil lobby group failed to realisethe magnitude of the action, that Mahinda and his family was consolidating absolute power in the country by dismissing the Chief Justice as if the judge was of the same footing like an average government employee that could be dismissed at wish of theexecutive president. The principal problem that Sri Lanka suffers is the executive presidency that makes the president, the most powerful, and the least accountable person, in the entire country. A resolution cannot resolve this, and truly, Mahinda might least bother.

Regarding the proposed resolution, India is part of the international politics that will play out in the coming days at the UN. The country and its permanent mission in Geneva will have tough time, negotiating the wording of the resolution, since it is in a precarious position, that New Delhi certainly will not want to be contributing into an internationalresolution that urges a member state to undertake specific activities.

Understandably, New Delhi would find it difficult to reconcile with a resolution that urges one of India's neighbour that has an elected government to collaborate with the UN special procedure mechanisms. This includes extending open invitations to the UN Special Rapporteurs. India is infamous for refusing Rapporteurs official entry into thecountry. Neither could New Delhi easily agree to a resolution that requests a neighbour to cooperate with the UN on technical assistance on reconciliation and accountability.

Sri Lanka's contest regarding the character of Ealem War IV, that the government forces were fighting 'terrorists', resonates well with India's position in Jammu and Kashmir as well as in Manipur. The proposed resolution is a double-edged weapon that could be used as 'precedence' in international law against India. The fact that accountability also involves the possibility of the political as well as military leadership later tried for crimes, would not go well in New Delhi. This also exposes the lack of honesty in the support that some members of the opposition political parties in India extends to the proposedresolution, that none of them are so far concerned about similar human rights abuses committed in India, definitely not within the same short span. It is an undeniable fact that India is in a perpetual war with its own people in Manipur and Jammu and Kashmir.

India is weighing these possibilities and in the process busy in intense diplomatic exercises in Europe and New York to soften the wording of the proposed resolution. It is here that India is trying to play its undeniable regional power politics and once again claiming its legitimate claim in international arena as a global power.

Many western nations have a lot at stake with their relationships with India and China, to such extent that some of their economies entirely depend on business with these two countries, which they would not want to sacrifice at the altar of the Sri Lankan resolution,a state that is of least interest to many.

On an equal footing, while New Delhi would not want yet another rouge state in its neighbourhood, which is on all fronts an unwelcome scenario, the country would not want an international intervention, 'sponsored' by the 'west' in its backyard without it being 'adequately' consulted, a matter of India's pride. Deciding on the proposed resolutionhence is not a yes or no job at New Delhi. In all sense, the resolution is India's nemesisin international politics.

Document Type :

Statement

Document ID :

AHRC-STM-055-2013

Countries :

India

Issues :

Democracy, Impunity, International human rights mechanisms, Rule of law, Administration of justice

Sri Lanka Preparing For Another International Embarrassment

By Paul Newman -March 9, 2013

Dr. Paul Newman

The 2nd  draft resolution was taken up on the 8th afternoon for discussion by the US. The preamble and the operational part were clearly explained by the US Ambassador to the UN Ms.Eileen Chamberlain Donahoe, told the participants that US wanted to constructively engage Sri Lanka, unfortunate Sri Lanka did not respond positively despite high level delegation visits. She cited the visit of Mr.G.L.Pieris to Washington to meet Ms.Hilary Clinton. Colombo has refused working on a joint resolution. There were new elements in the text when compared to resolution 19/2 brought in March 1012.

The preamble and the operational paragraph were read out and the US ambassador stressing that the GoSL should implement the recommendations of the Office of the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights report along with the Lesson Learnt and Reconcilliation Commission and the National Action Plan.

In response Sri Lanka was given the opportunity to make their point. Mr.Ravinatha Aryasinha, the Sri Lankan Permanent Representative of Sri Lanka to the United Nations in Geneva spoke from a written text. The stated that GoSL does not recognize resolution 19/2 passed last march as it was unfair, unjust, against genuine dialogue and politically motivated. It went against the spirit of engagement as Sri Lanka always reciprocated with an open mind.

He pointed out that the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights went beyond her mandate and stated that the present resolution was misconceived and arbitrary, far from being a procedural resolution.

There were no appreciation of the positive contributions Sri Lanka had made towards reconciliation includingIDP resettlement, reduction of High Security Zones, demilitarization, landmine clearance, infrastructural development, creation of employment opportunities etc.

The first country to respond before the para by para discussion was taken up was Japan which stated that Sri Lanka was cooperating with the International Community and were not like North Korea.

European Union (EU) supported the resolution on the ground that it was important to give justice to the victims along with fixing accountability.

China opined that the resolution should have reflected the positive side of reconciliation and it was unfair to single out Sri Lanka as they had cooperated through the Universal Periodic Review (UPR). Russia supported the Chinese claims and called the resolution as intrusive and political.

Venezuela made it clear that it does not support any country specific resolution and observed that the GoSL was working hard on human rights!

Pakistan called the 19th session resolution as unwanted, unwarranted and imbalanced and proposed changes to the present draft.

Iran felt that the mandate given in the 19/2 resolution was negated and deviated. The US had turned a blind eye to the progress made by the GoSL and the main approach should be constructive dialogue.

Canada felt that the GoSL had sadly failed the victims. The present resolution is a necessary initiative, the No Fire Zone of Channel 4 did not convince any viewer of  progress made by the GoSL.

Cuba was against any country specific resolution and the best option was the UPR where countries voluntarily agreed to work to enhance human rights. They felt Sri Lanka needs space and time to implement the LLRC.

Thailand felt that dialogue and cooperation were better than bringing country specific resolutions. They were concerned that this year’s draft departs from resolution 19/2 and the text was not balanced and the reconciliation process will take time.

Indonesia supported Sri Lanka based on their own experiences dealing with such situations.

UK supported the resolution in it full content and felt the new elements introduced in this resolution was necessary. They shared their concern on the ongoing violations, welcoming the resolution.

Germany was for the resolution and stated that they have seen changes in infrastructure but wanted to know the progress in accountability and reconciliation.

France felt that the resolution was very important and appreciated the work of the US.

Austria reminded that they had co-sponsored the 19/2 last year and felt there was no substantial progress achieved on political power devolution, and observed that the attack on judiciary was not addresses by the GoSL. Norway too supported the resolution.

When the discussion came up Pakistan wanted to redraft the resolution by praising the work done by Sri Lanka welcoming and acknowledging the reconciliation process including resettlement of IDPs, demining and devellopoing livelihood.

UK felt that the situation was far from being normal. Austria stated that nobody should be confused with infrastructure development and political process. Canada observed that ‘High ways have come and facilitated the influx of other people’.

Pakistan,Cuba,China,Russia,Indonesia wanted the removal of Preamble para 9 and 10 to be removed but Germany, Switzerland, Denmark,Austria, UK, France Sweden wanted the paras to be kept as it is with Canada wanting to add that there should be freedom of religion observing that the Muslim community had become the latest target. Egypt wanted a change of word from failure to urge.

Moving on from there European Union wanted to note the large number of rejections of the UPR recommendations made to Sri Lanka, there was a dispute here as most countries including many from Europe and Africa felt that the UPR was a voluntary submission and countries had the right to select and reject recommendations.

Coming to the Operational para, Russia said that it would not welcome the report of the OHCHR as International investigations would directly interfere into the sovereignty of Sri Lanka and wanted the para to be deleted. China, Thailand and Indonesia supported Russia with Indonesia stating that the report of the OHCHR was not legally binding.

Austria wanted the para to be as it was, UK stated that the report of the OHCHR was based on the resolution passed last year. Chile welcomed the para. Switzerland stated that it was well written. Canada felt it was an important element and spoke of transitional justice and made a few recommendations which included appointment of a special commissioner to Inquire Enforced Disappearances and assimilation of minorities in decision making. They also observed that the report of the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights added value to the entire exercise.

As time was running out it was clear that among those who participated in the discussions that Pakistan, a great democracy was trying to speak on behalf of Sri Lanka. Russia, China,Cuba,Iran had objections to everything though they voted against the last resolution and do not have a vote this time. Clearly Japan, Indonesia, Venezuela, Pakistan and Thailand would not vote for the resolution.

On the other hand it looked as though Angola, Sierra Leone, Austria, Botswana, Switzerland, Germany among the voting members would surely vote for the US sponsored resolution. Now the million dollar question in everyone’s mind was why India had zipped its mouth without uttering a word during the entire proceedings being the world’s largest democracy especially after its former External Affairs minister Mr.Yeshwanth Sinha had reminded India that  “Foreign policy is not conducted out of fear, but with confidence and elan.”

*Dr.Paul Newman from the 22nd UNHRC, Geneva, Switzerland.

Such a long journey for justice by our own Mao Tse Tung

By  Paul Newman    Geneva10 Mar 2013

Posted 09-Mar-2013 Vol 4 Issue 10 Sathiyasivam Sinnaya, a 35-year-old bachelor, started his long walk from London to Geneva on the forenoon of February 20 with the aim of reaching Geneva on March 4 to personally submit a memorandum to the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, Navanetham Pillay. As a Tamil seeking justice to those still suffering in Sri Lanka, Sathi as he is known, felt that he had to do something that could catch the attention of the world. Sathi (second from left) walked 763 km from London to Geneva in 13 days to demand separate Eelam His friends were initially reluctant to support his march because of the harsh winter in this part of the world. Sathi gave his friends two options. He said, you either support me or I have no other choice but to immolate myself to draw the attention of the world to the Tamil cause. His friends got the message and agreed to support his long walk. Now, apart from the dampening snow all through the journey, the other challenge was to reach Geneva by Mar 4 when Tamils from all over Europe, Malaysia, US and Canada would assemble in front of the UN to press their demands. Sathi wanted to be there and submit a memorandum to Navanetham Pillay. There were only 13 days left and he had to cover a distance of 763 kilometers (not including the ferry journey to France). Sathi had the near impossible task of walking 58.69 km per day! But Sathi, the brave heart had made up his mind and he set out on his journey determined to reach Geneva in 13 days. As he walked day and night, the only thing that went in his mind was the sacrifices made by the women and children back home. The selfless sacrifices of young men and women of the LTTE motivated him to walk. Though his body could not take this rigorous task, the emotion filled Sathi had a strong will and his mind would never give up. All through the journey Tamils from towns and villages en route came to encourage him. A fellow Tamil, Amarnath, followed him on a car, and distributed campaign material to curious onlookers all along the route. Tamils from all over the world gathered in Geneva on March 4 There were times when Sathi slept just two hours in the night. Ultimately after braving the weather and fatigue, Sathi reached Geneva, carrying the Tamil Eelam and United Nations flags on the 4th morning to join over 5,000 other Tamils from all over the world to reiterate that Tamil Eelam was the only solution to the Tamil plight in Sri Lanka. His memorandum to the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights included the following key demands: 1. Initiate an independent international investigation into the systematic genocide of Tamils by successive Sinhala governments in the island of Sri Lanka. 2. Remove the Sinhala military from the Tamil people’s homeland. 3. Conduct a UN sponsored referendum to determine the political aspirations of Tamils in their homeland as well as amongst the Diaspora. 4. Ensure Sri Lanka offers a general amnesty to political prisoners and releases them without delay. Later, the special emissary of the Transnational Government of Tamil Eelam (TGTE) to the UN Human Rights Council, Manicka Vasagar, handed over a certificate of appreciation to Sathi who humbly accepted it and raised pro Eelam slogans shouting that the thirst for an Independent Eelam would be alive as long as thousands of youngsters like him were alive. Resolution to grant land for army camps, postponed due to Alliance oppose. Proposal made concerning the land allocations for forces camps at the Vadamarachchi east Divisional Coordination Committee meeting, was postponed due to Tamil National Alliance oppose.   The Divisional Coordination Committee meeting was held at the Vadamarachchi east Divisional Secretariat conference hall chaired by Jaffna district parliament member Silvesthiri Alenrin recently.   Lands existing in the Sembiyanpattru Roman Catholic Tamil mixed school, Thalaiyadi Roman Catholice Tamil mixed school, Maamunai governemnt Tamil mixed school, Kattaikaadu Roman Catholice Tamil mixed school,  and the state lands within these required lands  were requested for the construction of 55th battalion headquarters, and was  proposed at the Divisional Secretariat meeting.   Tamil National Alliance Jaffna district parliament member E.Saravanabawan and Point Pedro Divisional Council Chairman P.Sanjeevan notified that lands to the forces cannot be granted near residential areas.   Hence the proposal to grant lands for forces was postponed. Lands to forces near residential areas cannot be granted was said. Saturday , 09 March 2013