Tuesday, April 2, 2013

Anti-Lanka protests: Congress leaders face the

heat

TNN Mar 31, 2013,

MADURAI: Is the anti-Sri Lanka protests spearheaded by college students across the state acquiring an anti- Congress character?

On Saturday, a march by students in Virudhunagar towards the office of Congress leader and MP from the city, Manick Tagore, ended in a clash between students and Congress cadres. The incident comes close on the heels of a clash between protesting students and Congress workers in Trichy.

Tagore opted to downplay and the event and told TOI that he was not in Virudhunagar. "I have to inquire about the incident," he said, but added that the students who clashed with his supporters were affiliated to political parties. "If all the college students stage a protest, we can assume that it was a protest by students. But if only a handful come, it means they have come not as students but as party workers,'' he said. He blamed the clashes between students and Congressmen on "certain elements who wanted to divert the attention from the real issue".

Saturday's incident happened when a group of students from Virudhunagar Hindu Nadar's Senthikumara Nadar College marched towards the office of Tagore raising slogans. As they neared the office, a group of Congress cadres told them not to come near the office. The students refused to heed and when they closed in on the office, Congress cadres attacked them with pipes, said police.

Police personnel at the spot physically restrained the Congress workers from attacking the students. A few Congressmen and students were detained by police but let off after interrogation. "No complaints were given by the students. So no case has been registered,'' said a police officer. But a case has been registered against the students for unlawful assembly.

This is the second incident where Congress cadres and college students have faced-off since the anti Lanka protests gained momentum across the state. On March 28, Congress workers and students fought a pitched battle in Trichy after the latter damaged banners and billboards belonging to the party. The same day there Congress workers and students were involved in verbal duels in Erode and Karur. On Friday, students in Erode conducted mock funeral rites for Prime Minister Manmohan Singh and Congress president Sonia Gandhi. Students in Trichy are planning to stage a protest against Congress once students who were hospitalized after the incident are discharged.

The anti-Lanka protests that started close to the introduction of the US-sponsored resolution on human rights violations against Tamils at the UNHRC in Geneva has over time acquired a distinct anti-Centre, anti-Congress character. Barring Congress and CPM, political parties in Tamil Nadu have adopted a stringent anti-Colombo stand and have blamed New Delhi of being soft on Colombo. DMK sensing the public mood walked out of the UPA government on the Lanka issue. TN Congress leaders like G K Vasan have been making statements that reflect the anti-Lanka sentiment in the state, but students seem to be in no mood to listen.

Centre's stand on Tamil Nadu fishermen issue 'discriminatory': Karunanidhi

March 31, 2013

Chennai: The DMK, which quit the UPA over the Sri Lankan Tamils issue, today slammed the Centre for adopting a "discriminatory" approach in protecting fishermen from Tamil Nadu, who have been suffering at the hands of Sri Lankan Navy.

While the Centre initiated series of diplomatic and legal steps when two Italian Marines killed two fishermen from Kerala, the same approach was lacking when Tamil Nadu fishermen were battered by the Island nation's Navy, DMK chief M Karunanidhi said in a letter to his partymen.

Mr Karunanidhi, while focusing on the plight of Tamil fishermen, questioned the Centre: "What has the Indian government got to say over the arrest of 19 Tamil fishermen who are lodged in a Lankan prison and whose remand has now been extended till April 11?"

19 fishermen from Tamil Nadu were arrested by the Lankan Navy on March 13 for allegedly crossing into its territory and were later remanded to judicial custody in a prison at Anuradhapuram.

The DMK patriarch also sought to know from the Centre on how it would justify the "discrimination" of fishermen from Kerala and Tamil Nadu.

"Is it justifiable to discriminate between fishermen from Kerala and Tamil Nadu? So far 600 Tamil fishermen have been killed by the Sri Lankan Navy. Were there at least one instance, where the Indian government has shown the same interest, approach and promptness in coming to the rescue of Tamil fishermen, as it had shown in the Kerala fishermen - Italian Marines issue?," he stated.

He found fault with the way the state government handled the arrest of five Sri Lankan fishermen and pointed out, "While arrested Tamil fishermen's remands are being extended (in Sri Lanka), those arrested Sinhalese fishermen are being released here in a haste."

Referring to Prime Minister Manmohan Singh talking tough in the Parliament to ensure the return of two Italian Marines when Italy had refused to send them back to India, Karunanidhi said the Centre should adopt the same approach in dealing with the Tamil Nadu fishermen issue.

Hessel, A Message To The Sri Lankan Youth!

By Kamaya Jayatissa -

April 2, 2013

Kamaya Jayatissa

“I wish all of you to find your reason for indignation. This is a precious thing.”– Stéphane Hessel (Time for Outrage!)

With 4.5 million copies sold worldwide and translated into more than a dozen languages, Stéphane Hessel’s 32 page pamphlet Indignez-vous! (translated as Time for Outrage!) remains a source of inspiration to youth around the world. Named one of the world’s top thinkers by Foreign Policy magazine in 2011, Hessel died in February at age 95, leaving behind him a lesson, which is to never accept any kind of injustice.

French resistance fighter, concentration camp survivor, diplomat, human rights advocate, he participated in the drafting of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and inspired recent non-violent youth movements such as the Spanish Indignados, the GreekAganaktismenoi, Occupy Wall Street in New York and beyond. Many around the world took up his call for a “peaceful insurrection” against the growing inequities of global capitalism. When asked during an interview why he believed that indifference among youth was the worst’s of attitudes, Hessel replied:

“I was worried that so many young people in all our countries seem to have forgotten their responsibility for values. They are just responsible to find a flat, to get some money, to have material wealth. And they do not realize that that is going to be jeopardized if the basic democratic values are not fought for. […] You must find the things that you will not accept, that will outrage you. And these things, you must be able to fight against nonviolently, peacefully, but determinedly.”

Having witnessed nearly a century of world’s history and mostly inspired by Sartre’s philosophical footprint, Stéphane Hessel, the voice of the voiceless, was one of those who believed that every man is responsible as an individual. He believed that true humanity begins with a sense of responsibility to what has to be done, the responsibility to refuse to accept what is unacceptable.

In the current context, Hessel’s message appears to be quite relevant to Sri Lanka –especially given the recent incidents that are taking place, both internally and internationally. Indeed, almost four years have gone since the war ended and yet an authentic peace is still longed for in the island. Most importantly, extremism is escalating to the detriment of inter-cultural dialogue, mutual understanding and ultimately reconciliation. One can only wonder where Sri Lankan youth positions itself in all this.

The past decade has seen a growing recognition of the importance of youth participation in decision-making. However, when it comes to the actual involvement of young people in matters pertaining to reconciliation, as in many other countries, the Sri Lankan Government is only engaged in a consultative process at best. In the longer-term, this might potentially have negative consequences on the peace-building process itself as not taking young people’s concerns into account can lead to further frustration within society itself. The implication of youth, their perceptions and expectations are therefore essential in the shaping of a sustainable peace in Sri Lanka.

Similarly, one can also witness a loss of enthusiasm, of involvement and commitment among today’s youth in Sri Lanka, a youth which represents one quarter of the population. This can be explained by the fact that young people are often alienated by politics. They see less value in both mainstream politics and in the viability of alternative spaces. Indeed, few are those among the Sri Lankan youth who are voicing out their thoughts and frustrations on the recent socio-political hazards the country is going through. Others remain either indifferent or passive while many have given up hope by saying that this is not the right time and place for change, that the space is not [yet] available to rise up and give a voice to our dreams.

Yet, what better moment than today to develop creative and critical thinking, to find our reason for indignation; for this is the best moment to make a change, right now when our values and principles are falling apart. It is our moral responsibility as youth to make a difference and strive for a better Sri Lanka, one in which racism and extremism will not be accepted, one in which our people will finally gather as a nation.

Our generation has the duty to build and strengthen a sustainable peace in our country so that the next generation does not go through another civil war based on ethno-religious tensions. Or else, by not fighting for further dialogue, for further unity, we will be as responsible as the ones spreading hatred between our own people. Mostly, by passively accepting injustice we will become the victims of our own indifference.

But as Hessel reminds us constantly in his pamphlet, these insurrections should always be done non-violently, for words are the best weapon our generation will ever have:

“I am convinced that future belongs to non-violence, to the reconciliation of different cultures. […] Hope has always been one of the dominant forces of revolutions and insurrections and how I still feel that hope is my conception for the future. We must understand that violence turns his back on hope. […] To create is to resist, to resist is to create.” (Time for Outrage!)

A hyperactive nonagenarian, Stéphane Hessel dedicated his life to encourage people to demand change and to fight for a better world. For him resisting injustice was his most passionate responsibility.

*Kamaya Jayatissa, President of What’s Next!, is a PhD student in International Law at the Sorbonne University, Paris. She holds a Master Degree in International Law from the Sorbonne and a Diploma in International Governance and Sustainable Development from Sciences Po, Paris. This article first appeared on Ceylon Today.

We Know Where We Are Sitting – But Don’t Need “Consultants” To Find Answers

By Kusal Perera -April 2, 2013

Kusal Perera

“You are sitting on an illegal Constitution – You have no standing to lecture us !” I am told by Ms. Usha S. Sri Skanda Rajah. Thank you Madam ! May I now ask, “What standing has a person sitting under the Canadian Constitution, to lecture us living here in Sri Lanka ?” Is it your standing now as a citizen of the First World ? Sorry madam, that counts absolutely nothing for me. I would instead listen to anything a Tamil person in the Vanni has to say. Or to anything a Tamil person still called a SL “refugee” in the Chengalpattu camp would have to say on the issue of separation and their fate.

That clearly said, let me say, I ventured into this discussion with a fervent hope, there would be Sri Lankan citizens (Sinhala, Tamil and Muslim) who’d want to discuss the issue of a separate State as against any other alternative as a permanent solution to the political conflict. Unfortunately, no SL Tamil or Muslim, nor a Sinhalese living here in SL joined in the discussion. I was compelled therefore to waste my time with those who have very remote and ancient links to Sri Lanka now living in Toronto, New York, or London in first world comfort and those emotive souls from Chennai and Bangalore. With those who think, it is their decision that SL Tamils have to follow. Far worse is their belief, the Sinhala citizens don’t have to be party to any decision on the SL Tamil conflict.

Sadly, they don’t even know what’s happening here. At least the Chair of the TGTE Senate (who ever who appointed it) proves she is that. She does not know that the LSSP is a constituent party of the Rajapaksa regime from day one, when she says SL would need a thousand venerable monks like Samitha Thero to ignite a thousand lights of wisdom ! She sees in Samitha Thero, much wisdom that could ignite a debate on making SL a secular State. Unfortunately for her, at the next elections too, Samitha Thero and his LSSP that will never leave this Rajapaksa regime, will be asking the people to vote MR and his government to power. Ms. Sri Skanda Rajah does not know, President Rajapaksa often have better quotes on unity, secularism, justice and even peace than Samitha Thero, she could have quoted. That’s how much these “run away souls” know of present day SL and its politics.

Does it serve any sane purpose therefore to continue this debate, with those who have no right to tell us Sri Lankans, what we should do here in Sri Lanka ? I would leave them to themselves to steam off their vengeance and satisfy their egos, from those far away comfort zones. We have a bleeding conflict to find answers for. People here need permanent answers to their devastated lives, not romantic, elusive dreams to sit on for another 20 years, as designed by Tamil “Consultants” from afar.

GTF puts forth demands

Calls for international investigation

Tuesday, 02 April 2013

The Global Tamil Forum's (GTF) demand for justice through an independant international investigation has been strengthen by the fact that the international community wants the accountability issues addressed by Sri Lanka ...

see full text below

Historic Resolution Passed in Tamil Nadu

Review by Prime Minister of the Transnational Government of Tamil Eelam V. Rudrakumaran.

Apr-01-2013

Courtesy: srilankabrief.org

(TAMIL NADU, India) - The Tamil Nadu State Assembly unanimously adopted a historic resolution yesterday, March 27, 2013 under the distinguished leadership of Hon Selvi Jayalalitha, the Chief Minister.

The highlights of this resolution are as follows:

The Tamil Nadu State Assembly adopts the following resolution and strongly requests the Indian Government that,

“….The Indian Government refrains from referring to Sri Lanka as a ‘friendly country’ from hereon…,

An independent and international investigation into the Genocide and War Crimes perpetrated by Sri Lanka during the civil war comes into place,

Based on the International Investigation all perpetrators of these crimes should be brought before an International Court of Justice and punished,

Economic sanctions against Sri Lanka are imposed until it puts an end to the atrocities being committed against Tamils,

It takes necessary steps to bring a resolution at the UN Security Council which, in due recognition of the future of Tamils of Tamil Eelam, leads to a referendum with regard to these matters being conducted among the Tamils living in Sri Lanka, and all Tamil Diaspora displaced from Sri Lanka who are living in various parts of the world.”

The Transnational Government of Tamil Eelam(TGTE), on behalf of the people of Tamil Eelam, expresses its delight and profound gratitude to Chief Minister of Tamil Nadu, Hon. SelviJayalalitha, the leaders of all the political parties and the people of Tamil Nadu for adopting such a firm resolution.

The content of this historic resolution moved by the Chief Minister of Tamil Nadu makes it an important political document that encompasses the political will of the Tamil people, reveals the anti-Tamil stance of the Sri Lankan state, and reflects an understanding of the international mechanism that is needed.

This resolution stands as excellent testimony to the remarkable political acumen and statesmanship of SelviJayalalitha, and we, at the TGTE, congratulate her on bringing forth such an excellent resolution at this time.

We urge the Indian Government to give due recognition to this resolution. Also, we appeal in solidarity to the Chief Minister and the people of Tamil Nadu to follow up with action at the Centre to lead to implementation of the provisions contained in this resolution.

We join hands with the student population of Tamil Nadu with a strong sense of solidarity for the relentless manner in which they have kept alive the struggle in support of the people of Tamil Eelam. It is only whenthe provisions of this resolution are accepted by the Central Government of India that there would be effective follow-up action.

We firmly believe that the student population of Tamil Nadu has the capacity to ensure that the Central Government of India accepts this resolution. It is our fervent hope that the students of Tamil Nadu will not stop until a structured project is in place to undertake actions that would realize the resolution.

Thank you

Visvanathan Rudrakumaran

Prime Minister

Transnational Government of Tamil Eelam (TGTE)

Human Rights Council unanimously adopts resolution on Human Rights Defenders

Monday, April 1, 2013

Mrs. Margaret Sekaggya as Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights defenders© UN Photo

''Welcomes the work of the Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights defenders, including her two latest reports submitted pursuant to General Assembly resolution 66/164 and Human Rights Council resolution 16/5, on the use of legislation affecting the activities of human rights defenders,and national human rights institutions, respectively; ''

Human Rights Council

Twenty-second session

Agenda item 3

Promotion and protection of all human rights, civil,
political, economic, social and cultural rights,
including the right to development

Argentina, Armenia*, Austria, Bosnia and Herzegovina^*, Chile, Costa Rica, Côte d’Ivoire, Czech Republic, Estonia, France^*, Georgia^*, Germany, Honduras^*, Hungary^*, Iceland^*, Ireland, Mexico^*, Montenegro, Norway^*, Paraguay^*, Peru, Poland, Portugal^*, Slovakia^*, Spain, Sweden^*, Switzerland, the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia^*, Timor-Leste^*, Turkey^*, Uruguay^*: draft resolution

22/… Protecting human rights defenders

The Human Rights Council,

Guided by the Universal Declaration of Human Rights,

Recalling General Assembly resolution 53/144 of 9 December 1998, by which the Assembly adopted by consensus the Declaration on the Right and Responsibility of Individuals, Groups and Organs of Society to Promote and Protect Universally Recognized Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms annexed to that resolution, and reiterating the importance of the Declaration and its promotion and implementation,

Recalling also the continued validity and application of all the provisions of the above-mentioned Declaration,

Recalling further all previous resolutions on this subject, in particular Human Rights Council resolutions 13/13 of 25 March 2010 and 16/5 of 24 March 2011, and General Assembly resolution 66/164 of 19 December 2011,

Recalling the Vienna Declaration and Programme of Action,

Reaffirming that States are under the obligation to protect all human rights and fundamental freedoms of all persons,

Acknowledging that human rights defenders play an important role at the local, national, regional and international levels in the promotion and protection of human rights,

Stressing that respect and support for the activities of human rights defenders, including women human rights defenders, is essential to the overall enjoyment of human rights,

Mindful that domestic law and administrative provisions and their application should facilitate the work of human rights defenders, including by avoiding any criminalization, stigmatization, impediments, obstructions or restrictions thereof contrary to international human rights law,

Reiterating the grave concerns expressed by the General Assembly in its resolution 66/164 regarding the serious nature of risks faced by human rights defenders due to threats, attacks and acts of intimidation against them,

Gravely concerned that, in some instances, national security and counter-terrorism legislation and other measures, such as laws regulating civil society organizations, have been misused to target human rights defenders or have hindered their work and endangered their safety in a manner contrary to international law,

Recognizing in this regard that new forms of communication, including the dissemination of information online and offline, can serve as important tools for human rights defenders to promote and strive for the protection of human rights,

Recognizing also the urgent need to address, and to take concrete steps to prevent and stop, the use of legislation to hinder or limit unduly the ability of human rights defenders to exercise their work, including by reviewing and, where necessary, amending relevant legislation and its implementation in order to ensure compliance with international human rights law,

Welcoming the steps taken by some States towards adopting policies or legislation for the protection of individuals, groups and organs of society engaged in promoting and defending human rights, including the decriminalization of defamation, that serve to protect human rights defenders from being prosecuted for peaceful activities, and against threats, harassment, intimidation, duress, arbitrary detention or arrest, violence and attacks by State and non-State actors;

1. Welcomes the work of the Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights defenders, including her two latest reports submitted pursuant to General Assembly resolution 66/164 and Human Rights Council resolution 16/5, on the use of legislation affecting the activities of human rights defenders,[1] and national human rights institutions, [2] respectively;

2. Urges States to create a safe and enabling environment in which human rights defenders can operate free from hindrance and insecurity, in the whole country and in all sectors of society, including by extending support to local human rights defenders;

3. Stresses that legislation affecting the activities of human rights defenders and its application must be consistent with international human rights law, including the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, and guided by the Declaration on the Right and Responsibility of Individuals, Groups and Organs of Society to Promote and Protect Universally Recognized Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, and, in this regard, condemns the imposition of any limitations on the work and activities of human rights defenders enforced in contravention of international human rights law;

4. Calls upon States to ensure that legislation designed to guarantee public safety and public order contains clearly defined provisions consistent with international human rights law, including the principle of non-discrimination, and that such legislation is not used to impede or restrict the exercise of any human right, including freedom of expression, association and peaceful assembly, which are essential for the promotion and protection of other rights;

5. Urges States to acknowledge publicly the important and legitimate role of human rights defenders in the promotion of human rights, democracy and the rule of law as an essential component of ensuring their protection, including by respecting the independence of their organizations and by avoiding the stigmatization of their work;

6. Calls upon States to ensure that human rights defenders can perform their important role in the context of peaceful protests, in accordance with national legislation consistent with the Charter of the United Nations and international human rights law and, in this regard, to ensure that no one is subject to excessive or indiscriminate use of force, arbitrary arrest or detention, torture or other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, enforced disappearance, abuse of criminal and civil proceedings or threats of such acts;

7. Underlines that the access to and use of information technologies and the media of one’s choice, including radio, television and the Internet, should be promoted and facilitated at the national level, between States and at the international level as an integral part of the enjoyment of the fundamental rights to freedom of opinion and expression, and also encourages international cooperation aimed at the development of media and information and communications technologies in all countries;

8. Calls upon States to respect, protect and ensure the right to freedom of association of human rights defenders and, in this regard, to ensure, where procedures governing the registration of civil society organizations exist, that these are transparent, accessible, non-discriminatory, expeditious and inexpensive, allow for the possibility to appeal and avoid requiring re-registration, in accordance with national legislation, and are in conformity with international human rights law;

9. Also calls upon States to ensure that reporting requirements placed on individuals, groups and organs of society do not inhibit functional autonomy, and that restrictions are not discriminatorily imposed on potential sources of funding aimed at supporting the work of human rights defenders other than those ordinarily laid down for any other activity unrelated to human rights within the country to ensure transparency and accountability, and that no law should criminalize or delegitimize activities in defence of human rights on account of the geographic origin of funding thereto;

10. Calls upon States to ensure that measures to combat terrorism and preserve national security:

(a) Are in compliance with their obligations under international law, in particular under international human rights law, and do not hinder the work and safety of individuals, groups and organs of society engaged in promoting and defending human rights;

(b) Clearly identify which offences qualify as terrorist acts by defining transparent and foreseeable criteria, including, inter alia, considering without prejudice those formulated by the Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of human rights while countering terrorism;

(c) Prohibit and do not provide for, or have the effect of, subjecting persons to arbitrary detention, such as detention without due process guarantees, the deprivation of liberty that amounts to placing a detained person outside the protection of the law, or the illegal deprivation of liberty and transfer of individuals suspected of terrorist activities, nor the unlawful deprivation of the right to life or the trial of suspects without fundamental judicial guarantees;

(d) Allow appropriate access for relevant international bodies, non-governmental organizations and national human rights institutions, where such exist, to persons detained under anti-terrorism and other legislation relating to national security, and to ensure that human rights defenders are not harassed or prosecuted for providing legal assistance to persons detained and charged under legislation relating to national security;

11. Further calls upon States to ensure that all legal provisions and their application affecting human rights defenders are clearly defined, determinable and non-retroactive in order to avoid potential abuse to the detriment of fundamental freedoms and human rights, and specifically to ensure that:

(a) The promotion and the protection of human rights are not criminalized, and that human rights defenders are not prevented from enjoying universal human rights owing to their work, whether they operate individually or in association with others, while emphasizing that everyone shall respect the human rights of others;

(b) The judiciary is independent, impartial and competent to review effectively legislation and its application affecting the work and activities of human rights defenders;

(c) Procedural safeguards, including in criminal cases against human rights defenders, are in place in accordance with international human rights law in order to avoid the use of unreliable evidence, unwarranted investigations and procedural delays, thereby effectively contributing to the expeditious closing of all unsubstantiated cases, with individuals being afforded the opportunity to lodge complaints directly with the appropriate authority;

(d) Any provision or decision that may interfere with the enjoyment of human rights must respect fundamental principles enshrined in international law so that they are lawful, proportionate, non-discriminatory and necessary in a democratic society;

(e) Information held by public authorities is proactively disclosed, and that transparent and clear laws and policies provide for a general right to request and receive such information, for which public access should be granted, except for narrow and clearly defined limitations;

(f) Restrictions are not invoked on access to information regarding grave violations of human rights;

(g) That provisions do not prevent public officials from being held accountable, and that penalties for defamation are limited in order to ensure proportionality and reparation commensurate to the harm done;

(h) Legislation aimed at preserving public morals is compatible with international human rights law;

(i) Legislation does not target activities of individuals and associations defending the rights of persons belonging to minorities or espousing minority beliefs;

(j) Dissenting views may be expressed peacefully;

12. Expresses particular concern about systemic and structural discrimination and violence faced by women human rights defenders, and calls upon States to integrate a gender perspective in their efforts to create a safe and enabling environment for the defence of human rights;

13. Reaffirms the right of everyone, individually and in association with others, to unhindered access to and communication with international bodies, in particular the United Nations, its representatives and mechanisms in the field of human rights, including the Human Rights Council, its special procedures, the universal periodic review mechanism and the treaty bodies, as well as regional human rights mechanisms;

14. Strongly calls upon all States:

(a) To refrain from, and ensure adequate protection from, any act of intimidation or reprisals against those who cooperate, have cooperated or seek to cooperate with international institutions, including their family members and associates;

(b) To fulfil the duty to end impunity for any such acts of intimidation or reprisals by bringing the perpetrators to justice and by providing an effective remedy for their victims;

15. Reaffirms the necessity for inclusive and open dialogue between civil society actors, particularly human rights defenders, and the United Nations in the field of human rights and, in this context, underlines that participation by civil society should be facilitated in a transparent, impartial and non-discriminatory manner;

16. Underlines the value of national human rights institutions, established and operating in accordance with the Paris Principles, in the continued monitoring of existing legislation and consistently informing the State about its impact on the activities of human rights defenders, including by making relevant and concrete recommendations;

17. Stressing in particular the valuable contribution of national human rights institutions, civil society and other stakeholders in providing input to States on the potential implications of draft legislation when such legislation is being developed or reviewed to ensure that it is in compliance with international human rights law;

18. Invites leaders in all sectors of society and respective communities, including political, social and religious leaders, and leaders in business and media, to express public support for the important role of human rights defenders and the legitimacy of their work;

19. Encourages States to include in their reports for the universal periodic review and to treaty bodies information on the steps taken to create a safe and enabling environment for human rights defenders, including by bringing legislation and its application affecting the activities of human rights defenders into line with international human rights law;

20. Encourages national human rights institutions, civil society and other stakeholders to provide information, including to States, in the context of the universal periodic review and the work of treaty bodies, on the enabling environment for human rights defenders, including legislation and its application affecting the activities of human rights defenders;

21. Encourages the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, the Special Rapporteur, relevant regional mechanisms and national human rights institutions to offer their assistance for the consideration of States in bringing their legislation and its application into line with international human rights law;

22. Invites States to seek assistance, including that which may be provided by the above-mentioned actors, in the process of reviewing, amending or developing legislation that affects or would affect, directly or indirectly, the work of human rights defenders;

23. Invites the Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights defenders to continue to execute the activities under her mandate, including in the follow-up to the present resolution, by monitoring progress and by providing guidance, assistance and follow-up with States, as needed;

24. Decides to remain seized of the matter.

* Non-Member State of the Human Rights Council.

[1] A/67/292.

[2] A/HRC/22/47.

Ten students enter SAITM

by Aisha Nazim-2013-04-02

The Inter-University Students' Federation (IUSF) yesterday condemned the government's move in which 10 students were granted scholarships to study at the South Asian Institute of Technology and Medicine (SAITM), stating that the Higher Education Ministry should focus on developing state universities, instead.

State universities currently lack basic facilities, with the Rajarata Medical Faculty being short of 37 teachers, the IUSF said.

Speaking to Ceylon Today, IUS Convener, Sanjeewa Bandara, pointed out that the government was doing nothing to benefit society or improve the situation of undergraduates who are unable to get into State universities due to lack of space, but is instead endorsing private universities by granting scholarships to selected students to enroll in those institutions.

Scholarship amounting to Rs 70 million was really granted to 10 students who achieved good results in the GCE A/L Science stream to continue their studies at the Malabe Private Medical College. Bandara claimed, if the scholarships had been granted to the State universities instead, the number of student intakes could be increased, and thereby they would not need to enter private universities for higher studies.

"Granting students scholarships to study at the Malabe Private Medical College only goes to show that the government is undermining State universities. If the funds had been granted to improve State universities, more students would benefit in the long run," he said.

When Ceylon Today contacted officials at the Higher Education Ministry for clarification regarding the issue, none of the officials, including the Secretary to the Higher Education Ministry, were available for comment.

Sri Lanka monks arrested over anti-Muslim attack

Agence France-PresseApril 1, 2013 13:16

Sri Lanka's police arrested three Buddhist monks on Monday over the destruction of a Muslim-owned clothing store that heightened religious tensions in the country, an official said.

Police superintendent Buddhika Siriwardena said the monks were detained four days after a mob of Sinhalese-Buddhist men vandalised and torched a section of the three-storey building in the Pepiliyana suburb of Colombo.

"Three monks were arrested after they surrendered today," police spokesman Buddhika Siriwardena told AFP. "They will be taken before a magistrate tomorrow. We are looking for more suspects."

Officials said the monks were among 17 held in connection with Thursday's attack which the main Muslim party in the ruling coalition said was a "sequel" to an on-going hate campaign against Muslims and other religious minorities.

Local television footage, some of which is posted on the YouTube website, showed a Buddhist monk bringing down a store CCTV camera in front of a cheering mob outside the Fashion Bug store, watched by at least four police constables.

Another monk is seen threatening a news cameraman who was later hospitalised after being assaulted by the mob.

Sri Lanka's newly-formed monk-led Bodu Bala Sena, or Buddhist Force, has denied any involvement and urged the government to bring the culprits to justice and clear the group's name.

The BBS was successful last month in forcing Islamic clerics to withdraw the 'halal" certification of food saying it was an affront to the majority non-Muslims in the country.

As the anti-halal move gripped the country, President Mahinda Rajapakse, who is a Buddhist, urged monks not to incite religious hatred.

The owners of the clothing store said Thursday's attack had "shocked and disturbed us a great deal and instilled fear in the minds of our staff members in carrying out their day to day work".

Muslims, who constitute about 10 percent of the country's 20 million population, are the second largest minority after the mainly Hindu ethnic Tamils. Seventy percent of the population are Sinhalese, most of whom are Buddhists.

Thursday's attack which raised safety fears among Muslims, was followed by another incident, this time against the main Tamil political party, in the island's north on Saturday.

The opposition Tamil National Alliance (TNA) said their meeting in the town of Kilinochchi was disrupted by a stone-throwing mob which had also attacked their vehicles and damaged a building while police looked on.

The military denied security forces were involved in Saturday's attack and insisted that the police had prevented a further escalation.

The United Nations estimates that Sri Lanka's ethnic civil war claimed at least 100,000 lives between 1972 and 2009, when Tamil separatist rebels were crushed in a major military offensive by government forces.

aj/ami