Monday, March 18, 2013

I never come through the back door - former CJ

MONDAY, 18 MARCH 2013

Former Chief Justice Dr. Shirani Bandaranayake, as has been noticed, is scheduled to appear before the Commission to investigate into allegations of bribery or corruption today (18th) at 9.00 a.m.

A request made to her to come through a rear door has been rejected by Dr. Bandaranayake. A police officer attached to the Bribery Commission had phoned her asking her to enter the Commission premises from a rear entrance. However, she has rejected the request saying she always uses the front door and never comes through the rear door.

Dr. Bandaranayake’s team of lawyers too is expected to accompany her to the Commission.

Sri Lankan government rejects request by special rapporteur to visit the country
Sun, Mar 17, 2013, 04:51 pm SL Time, ColomboPage News Desk, Sri Lanka.

Mar 17, Colombo: The government of Sri Lanka has refused a request by a special rapporteur of the Unite Nations Human Rights Council (UNHRC) to visit Sri Lanka.
The local media has reported that Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression, Frank La Rue has made a request to visit Sri Lanka.
The Permanent Mission of Sri Lanka to the United Nations Office at Geneva has informed La Rue that his mandate on Sri Lanka was only for the period the UNHRC resolution 19/2 adopted in March 2012 was in force and not after.
Sri Lanka's Ambassador to the UN in Geneva, Ravinatha Aryasinha had reportedly told the Special Rapporteur that the March 2012 resolution has now lapsed and is ready to be submitted to the 22nd session of the UNHRC currently meeting in Geneva.
"I hereby wish to inform you that your previous requests to visit Sri Lanka were transmitted to the relevant authorities for processing. However, with regard to your latest request to undertake an official visit to Sri Lanka, in the context of the mandate granted to you by the resolution 19/2 should have been made, as per due process, either immediately after the adoption of the resolution 19/2 in March 2012 or within a reasonable timeframe thereafter," Ambassador Aryasinha has said.
Aryasinha has added it is evident that the relevant timeframe has lapsed for any special procedures mandate holder to request to visit Sri Lanka in fulfillment of the mandate of resolution 19/2.
He has also reminded the Special Rapporteur on the Code of Conduct for Special Procedures Mandate holders of the Human Rights Council, in particular to the article which calls upon mandate holders to act in an independent capacity, and exercise their functions in accordance with their mandate, through a professional, impartial assessment of facts based on internationally recognized human rights standards, and free from any kind of extraneous influence, incitement, pressure, threat or interference, either direct or indirect, on the part of any party.

The UNHRC Assumes Sri Lanka Is A Prince Or A Princess

By Basil Fernando -March 18, 2013

Basil Fernando

In mythology we always hear about transformations; that a frog became a prince, or a beautiful princess became an ugly hag, and the like. These stories reflect the phenomenon of transformation, which happens in the lives of individuals as well as societies. When we talk about Sri Lanka, we also see many similar transformations. Some decades ago, Sri Lanka was a democracy. Now it is not a democracy. There has been a very basic transformation.

Such transformations can also be illustrated by what is happening today regarding the Chief Justice, Dr. Shirani Bandaranayke, being called before the Commission to Investigate Bribery and Corruption. The world is questioning what the government did in removing a chief justice without following the norms and standards that are expected to be followed in such a removal. She herself publically claims that she is still the legitimate chief justice. The government wants her image to be transformed in the minds of the public, locally and internationally, into that of a criminal.

Understanding this phenomenon of transformation is essential in enabling us to grasp what is happening to Sri Lanka before the United Nations Human Rights Council. Formally speaking, Sri Lanka is a member of the United Nations, a member like any other. Membership in the United Nations requires the acceptance of certain ideas and ideals regarding governance. Among such ideals are that each government treats its citizens as persons having human rights. The UN treatises enumerate these rights.

The organization has also, by agreement between the members, developed a system of review regarding the observance of these rights by the member states. The assumption on which any review is based is that, if there are any significant violations, other members have the right to question any member state.

Meanwhile, there is a fundamental transformation within the political system of Sri Lanka, wherein the government is no longer obliged to treat its citizens as persons having basic human rights. The constitutional system is so designed to make these rights a matter of irrelevance. To make a basic system for complaints available, to have complaints investigated and, where there are serious grounds to believe that violations have taken place, to prosecute the violators before the courts and punish them, are fundamental assumptions about the existence of human rights in any country. As for Sri Lanka, the system is so transformed now that there is no obligation on the part of the government to carry out such investigations or prosecutions.

It is on the basis of this transformation that the Sri Lankan government proclaims that it rejects the resolution passed by the Human Rights Council in 2012 and it will similarly reject the proposed resolution, which will be voted upon in the coming weeks. The resolution is based on the assumption that Sri Lanka, as a member state, accepts its obligations relating to the rights of its citizens. However, as far as the Sri Lankan authorities are concerned, that is no longer the case.

While all kinds of rhetoric is used to defend the government’s rejection of these resolutions, the actual reason is that the government believes that the issue of whether citizens have rights or not is its own business, and that membership of the Human Rights Council or the United Nations should not be based on the criterion of respect for the rights of citizens.

This is indeed the kind of situation that you find in mythology. What Sri Lanka is assumed to be, as a member of the United Nations, and what it is in reality is substantially different. It is not a question of the difference between an accepted ideal and its performance. That contradiction is always there, as no one will be able to conform to the ideals it proclaims in all circumstances. The situation of Sri Lanka is that it rejects the ideal itself. The Human Rights Council assumes that Sri Lanka is a prince or a princess. But Sri Lanka has politically transformed itself into a frog.

Chief Justice Shirani Says ‘No Comment’ To Both Media And The Bribery Commission

By Colombo Telegraph -March 18, 2013 |

Chief Justice Dr. Shirani Bandaranayake who appeared before the Bribery Commission this morning objected to certain members of the Commission on grounds of bias and will submit preliminary objections in writing before the Commission on April 1.

The legal team of the Chief Justice Bandaranayake informed investigating officers, that the nature and scope of the inquiry was not informed to the ousted Chief Justice, and therefore she was in no position to give a statement to the officials.

When media questioned she simply said ‘no comment’.

Video: Ousted CJ refuses to make statement to Bribery Commission

MONDAY, 18 MARCH 2013

Ousted Chief Justice Dr. Shirani Bandaranayake who appeared before the Bribery Commission this morning objected to certain members of the Commission on grounds of bias and will submit preliminary objections in writing before the Commission on April 1.

In her first public appearance since the controversial impeachment Dr. Bandaranayake did not make any statement to the media and proceeded to walk to the Commission office

Dr. Bandaranayake had thereafter refused to give a statement as requested to the Bribery Commission stating there was apparent and actual bias in certain Commissioners and pointed out that it was a violation of natural justice.

Thereafter the investigating officers requested the ousted Chief Justice to file Preliminary objections on April 1^st.

Further, the legal team of the ousted Chief Justice informed investigating officers, that the nature and scope of the inquiry was not informed to the ousted Chief Justice, and therefore she was in no position to give a statement to the officials.

The investigating officers had then briefly explained the scope of the inquiry which was regarding the declaration of assets and liabilities.

The legal team of the Chief Justice is set to file submissions on these grounds consequent to raising preliminary objections against members of the Commission.

The ousted Chief Justice accompanied by her legal team led by Presidents' Counsel Nalin Laduwahetty and Attorney-at- law Sugath Caldera arrived at the main entrance of the Commission at around 9 am this morning.

Earlier a sergent attached to the Bribery Commission had requested the ousted Chief Justice to enter the premises from the back entrance. The request was declined by Dr. Bandaranakayake.

They were greeted by a host of lawyers and members of the public. Dr. Bandarainayake did not make any comments to the media prior to entering the commission.

During this time lawyers and civilians gathered outside the commission held a silent protest carrying placards which said “stop harassing the legal CJ”.

After the 45 minute long inquiry Dr. Bandaranayake accompanied by Attorney at law Sugath Caldera walked out of the Commission and was hounded by eager media personnel.

However, Justice Bandaranayake simply said ‘no comment’ and proceeded towards her vehicle. Her lawyer Sugath Caldera also did not speak to the media.

Thereafter Justice Bandaranayake was driven away by her son Shaveen Bandaranaike accompanied by her husband Pradeep Kariyawasam (By Hafeel Farisz and Darshana Sanjeewa)

►WATCH

Sri Lanka, As It Heals From War

By Amy Karafin -March 17, 2013

Amy Karafin

As soon as I arrived at the temple, an old man caught my eye and directed me to the inner sanctum. It was hot outside, and the sun was strong. But it was even hotter in the temple, where hundreds of festivalgoers had gathered.

Once I walked beyond the crowds and entered the dark, smoky chamber, the air was cooler, though, with scents of burning ghee and faded coconut. The Hindu god Murugan, popular among the Tamil people of Sri Lanka, was in his alcove, garlanded in flowers and lighted by dozens of tiny oil lamps. I’m not a Hindu and tend toward agnostic, but my mother was sick, and the vibes here were strong. So I prayed.

Sri Lanka, as It Heals From War

Amy Karafin for The New York Times

Clockwise from upper left, the Keerimalai spring, thought to have healing powers, used to require an armed guard for a visit; an island-bound ferry; the edge of the city of Jaffna; a detail from the Naguleswaram Shiva Temple, recently restored.

By AMY KARAFIN

Published: March 15, 2013

As soon as I arrived at the temple, an old man caught my eye and directed me to the inner sanctum. It was hot outside, and the sun was strong. But it was even hotter in the temple, where hundreds of festivalgoers had gathered.

Multimedia

Map

Jaffna, Sri Lanka

Enlarge This Image

Amy Karafin for The New York Times

Naguleswaram Shiva Temple.

My two-week trip here last June was my second visit to the Jaffna Peninsula, a 400-square-mile expanse of Technicolor temples and arid, surreally beautiful landscapes in northern Sri Lanka that have only recently opened to tourists after a 26-year civil war. I had traveled there in 2011 to research a guidebook, but that trip had been packed with activity; this time I wanted to explore the area at my own pace. So, basing myself in a guesthouse in the capital of Jaffna on the peninsula’s southwest coast, I returned to linger in the region’s temples and visit the tiny islands offshore.

One of the first things I did was hire a car and driver and travel 10 miles to the Maviddapuram Kandaswamy Temple, where I had received a warm welcome from the priest’s family on my previous visit. Reminders of the war were all around. As we drove through the village of Maviddapuram, we passed abandoned houses; vegetation grew in former living rooms and banyan trees spilled over walls.

The temple itself had been hit hard during the war and is still being reconstructed. Much of the 17th-century structure that once stood there is gone, though its ornate 108-foot gopuram (tower), covered in sculptured gods, has been rebuilt. Over and over again I would see evidence of the civil war, which began in 1983 and continued until 2009. During that time, militants seeking a separate Tamil state in the north and east (an area including the largely Tamil Jaffna peninsula) were pitted against the government, which had, since independence from the British in 1948, become dominated by pro-Sinhalese policies.

Because the Maviddapuram temple had been part of a “high security zone” occupied by the military, its priests, along with thousands of families, had been evicted, and the structure was bombed and looted. Now things were finally returning to normal: the priests and worshipers were returning, and a reconstructed temple was rising from the rubble.

Two miles down the road, Maviddapuram’s sister temple, the ancient Naguleswaram Shiva Temple, has also been renewed: its interior now gleams with a thousand colors, and its sacred Keerimalai Spring is full of bathers seeking the mineral water’s healing powers. Guidebooks from 10 years ago mention that visitors may, if they are lucky, visit the spring after military searches and with an armed escort. But now travelers can go, as I did, escort-free, and, float in the pools (there is one just for women), thinking about the Tamil princess who discovered the sacred spring in the seventh century.

Elsewhere on the peninsula, damage from the war is also obvious, including in Jaffna, the largest city in the region, with a population of around 90,000. During the war, the capital, which is the spiritual and intellectual heart of Sri Lanka’s Tamil people, was caught in the cross-fire between the separatists and the government, neither of which fully represented its aspirations. Many believe that even though the fighting has ended, the disenfranchisement of Tamils from the political process continues.

Still, the town is peaceful now, and danger to travelers is minimal. During my visits, I avoided walking Jaffna’s quiet streets alone at night, but I never felt unsafe; on the contrary, the residents I encountered were happy to see travelers returning.

Even in the few months between my visits, Jaffna seemed transformed. The market had more shops, painted in brighter colors, and soldiers no longer kept watch on every street corner.

What are Human Rights?

Posted by H.E.N.R.Dewi Nurmayani on March 7, 2013

The original document from the first Geneva Convention in 1864 provided for care to wounded soldiers.

The First Geneva Convention (1864)

The true civilization is where every man gives to every other man every right he claims for himself.

- Robert G. Ingersoll

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.

—United States Declaration of Independence, 1776

The ideal of free human beings enjoying civil and political freedom and freedom from fear and want can only be achieved if conditions are created whereby everyone may enjoy his civil and political rights, as well as his social, economic and cultural rights.

—International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and the International Covenant on Economic Social and Cultural Rights, 1966

All human rights are universal, indivisible and interdependent and related. The international community must treat human rights globally in a fair and equal manner, on the same footing, and with the same emphasis.

—Vienna Declaration and Programme of Action, World Conference on Human Rights, 1993

Whereas it is essential, if man is not to be compelled to have recourse, as a last resort, to rebellion against tyranny and oppression, that human rights should be protected by the rule of law.

—Preamble to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, 1948

Human rights belong to every member of the human family regardless of sex, race, nationality, socio-economic group, political opinion, sexual orientation or any other status.

Human rights are universal. They apply to all people simply on the basis of being human.

Human rights are inalienable. They cannot be taken away simply because we do not like the person seeking to exercise their rights. They can only be limited in certain tightly defined circumstances, and some rights, such as the prohibition on torture and slavery, can never be limited.

Human rights are indivisible. You cannot pick and choose which rights you want to honour. Many rights depend on each other to be meaningful – so, for example, the right to fair trial would be meaningless without the prohibition on discrimination, and the right to free speech must go hand in hand with the right to assemble peacefully.

Human rights are owed by the State to the people – this means public bodies must respect your human rights and the Government must ensure there are laws in place so that other people respect your human rights too. For example, the right to life requires not only that the actions of those working on behalf of the State do not lead to your death, but that laws are also in place to protect you from the actions of others that might want to do you harm.

Human rights were first recognised internationally by the Universal Declaration on Human Rights in 1948. This was quickly followed by the adoption two years later of the European Convention on Human Rights. In 1998 the Human Rights Act was passed making the human rights in the European Convention on Human Rights directly enforceable in the UK. It entered into force on 2 October 2000.

The UK is also a party to a number of other international instruments that seek to protect and promote other human rights.

What are human rights?

Human rights are rights inherent to all human beings, whatever our nationality, place of residence, sex, national or ethnic origin, colour, religion, language, or any other status. We are all equally entitled to our human rights without discrimination. These rights are all interrelated, interdependent and indivisible.

Universal human rights are often expressed and guaranteed by law, in the forms of treaties, customary international law , general principles and other sources of international law. International human rights law lays down obligations of Governments to act in certain ways or to refrain from certain acts, in order to promote and protect human rights and fundamental freedoms of individuals or groups.

Universal and inalienable

The principle of universality of human rights is the cornerstone of international human rights law. This principle, as first emphasized in the Universal Declaration on Human Rights in 1948, has been reiterated in numerous international human rights conventions, declarations, and resolutions. The 1993 Vienna World Conference on Human Rights, for example, noted that it is the duty of States to promote and protect all human rights and fundamental freedoms, regardless of their political, economic and cultural systems.

All States have ratified at least one, and 80% of States have ratified four or more, of the core human rights treaties, reflecting consent of States which creates legal obligations for them and giving concrete expression to universality. Some fundamental human rights norms enjoy universal protection by customary international law across all boundaries and civilizations.

Human rights are inalienable. They should not be taken away, except in specific situations and according to due process. For example, the right to liberty may be restricted if a person is found guilty of a crime by a court of law.

Interdependent and indivisible

All human rights are indivisible, whether they are civil and political rights, such as the right to life, equality before the law and freedom of expression; economic, social and cultural rights, such as the rights to work, social security and education , or collective rights, such as the rights to development and self-determination, are indivisible, interrelated and interdependent. The improvement of one right facilitates advancement of the others. Likewise, the deprivation of one right adversely affects the others.

Equal and non-discriminatory

Non-discrimination is a cross-cutting principle in international human rights law. The principle is present in all the major human rights treaties and provides the central theme of some of international human rights conventions such as the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination and the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women.

The principle applies to everyone in relation to all human rights and freedoms and it prohibits discrimination on the basis of a list of non-exhaustive categories such as sex, race, colour and so on. The principle of non-discrimination is complemented by the principle of equality, as stated in Article 1 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights: “All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights.”

Both Rights and Obligations Read More

Video: Another Sri Lankan Buddhist Monk Is Attacked In Chennai Central

By Colombo Telegraph -March 18, 2013

Another Sri Lankan Buddhist monk is being attacked in the Chennai Central station India on Tamil Nadu Express train yesterday. The Buddhist monk who is a Sri Lankan national from Kandy on a pilgrimage in Tamil Nadu with a group of pilgrims.