Monday, September 28, 2015

Supermoon: the best pictures and footage from across Britain

MONDAY 28 SEPTEMBER 2015
The supermoon lit up the dark skies of Britain last night for the first time in 30 years. Here is exclusive footage from the 3am lunar event and some of the most stunning photographs.

Early risers were rewarded with a chance to see a stunning blood red "supermoon" in the skies above Britain for the first time in 30 years.

Historically the eerie light created from a lunar eclipse with the moon near to its closest point to the earth delighted amateur astronomers and photographers, while filling others with dread.

The event began from 1.10am in the UK, with the "total" phase - when the moon is completely in shadow - lasting from 3.11am to 4.24am. It was to go on all the way until the moon emerged from earth's shadow at 6.24am.

When the moon is at perigee, its shortest distance from the earth, it is 226,000 miles away and appears 14 per cent larger and 30 per cent brighter than when it is at its furthermost point.

The last time this coincided with a lunar eclipse, when the moon is covered by the earth's shadow, was in 1982 and the event will not be repeated until 2033.
During a lunar eclipse, the moon turns a deep rusty red, due to sunlight being scattered by earth's atmosphere.

Through the ages, so-called "blood moons" have been viewed as ill omens by superstitious people.

Dozens of amateur photographers posted their best efforts on social media, although those taking pictures on their phones were mostly disappointed.

Unlike with a solar eclipse, a lunar eclipse is completely safe to observe through binoculars or a small telescope.

Many believe this eclipse was significant as it marks the completion of an unusual line-up of four total eclipses at six-monthly intervals known as a "tetrad".

Texan pastor and author John Hagee says this has only happened three times in the past 500 years and claimed it is likely to herald a "hugely significant" world event.

Sunday, September 27, 2015

UN chief 'encouraged' by Sri Lanka response to war crimes report

September 18, 2015

United Nations (United States) (AFP) - UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon said Thursday he was "encouraged" by the Sri Lankan government's response to a damning UN report about horrific abuses during the war with Tamil Tiger rebels.

Ban's statement followed the release of the long-awaited report from the UN human rights office on Wednesday which alleged that tens of thousands of people had disappeared during the bitter conflict.

Colombo in response did not commit to the UN's key recommendation to allow international experts to assist its domestic investigation, but pledged to punish those found guilty of war crimes during the 26-year war.

Ban said he was "encouraged by the response of, and commitment expressed by, the government of Sri Lanka and the opposition to consult widely with all stakeholders and take meaningful action to address these issues."

He also said he hopes the report's recommendations would support government efforts in "a genuine and credible process of accountability and reconciliation that meets international standards."

"The victims of all communities, their families and the Sri Lankan nation itself demand no less than a full and proper reckoning," Ban said.

The UN report identified patterns of grave violations "strongly indicating that war crimes and crimes against humanity" had been committed by both sides.

The conflict killed more than 100,000 and ended in 2009 with the defeat of the rebels.

Demilitarise the Occupied N&E Now! – Kumar David

( The peace symbol )

27/09/2015

Don’t be complacent about Rajapaksa brand racial inciters.

Prime Minister Ranil Wickremesinghe it seems is pushing for an expeditious replacement constitution. I suspect he is of the view that if there is moderate devolution to Tamil areas within six or twelve months, international and local demands for punishment of convicted (fat hopes if it’s a 100% domestic process) politicians and military brass can be defused. An accommodating President Sirisena will no doubt be glad to garland culprits with an amnesty. I can’t see even small punishments or a rap on the knuckles; that’s the power hegemonic politics. A domestic process sans international component will flop because Lanka has neither systems nor ethos to handle it. Realistically however I am reconciled to the inevitable as my preferences will make little impact.

Demilitarise the Occupied N&E Now! – Kumar David by Thavam Ratna

Consensus on US resolution before UNHRC

By Our Political Editor-

Ranil and Mangala hold several rounds of talks with western envoys to finalise new resolution; Lanka’s Geneva envoy reprimanded
Resolution encourages Commonwealth or foreign participation
Sirisena says there cannot be two Presidents; orders review of security arrangements for Rajapaksas
Cabinet committee meets JVP leader, promises effective probe on ten high profile cases

Findings that Sri Lankan troops and Tiger guerrillas allegedly committed war crimes spurred the Government into action in many spheres this week. This is whilst the first United States draft resolution on the findings of the OISL (the OHCHR investigation on Sri Lanka) went through some significant changes during informal public discussions by members of the Human Rights Council.

Consensus on US resolution before UNHRC.odt by Thavam Ratna

A Reflection On Oxford Professor Tariq Ramadan’s Visit To Sri Lanka

By Ummu Hana –September 27, 2015

“Pluralism is a fact and now we have to deal with it and try to find solution. It starts with our mind, our intellect, and our way of understanding and putting things and its quiet challenging. When we speak about pluralism, we should be at the same time rooted in our tradition and open to the other traditions.” Philosopher Tariq Ramadan, at 18th annual commemorative lecture of the late Speaker of the Parliament of Sri Lanka M.A Bakeer Markar, 21st September 2015.

Sri Lankan Muslim community of 21st century is in desperate crisis to understand and reconcile between the scriptural text and the exemplary traditions of prophets in line with the higher values and objectives of Islam such as justice, dignity and respect to humanity in a rational form.

Tariq Ramadan, at 18th annual commemorative lecture of the late Speaker of the Parliament of Sri Lanka M.A Bakeer Markar, 21st September 2015.

The Oxford Professor Tariq Ramadan’s philosophical thoughts explicitly interconnect the scriptural values (that are Sri Lankan values as well) with prophet Mohamed’s tradition and illustrate the consistence between specific individual texts with the overall objectives of scriptural text (Quran) and demand Sri Lankan Muslims to be consistent with the values and objectives and become as an asset by their contribution witnessing and struggling for social justice toward all Sri Lankan communities.

Tariq Ramadan’s thoughts are healing to Sri Lankan Muslim community who is in desperate need to understand and reconcile within, as to how to be fully aligned with faith of god and at the same time fully engaged with local development in every social spectrum to enrich the humanity at large and witness them as a mercy to humanity.

The pending UN Resolution on Sri Lanka

Those who say that the resolution on Sri Lanka is too long and therefore the government wants to shorten it have not seen other resolutions on different situations. This pretext to remove references to High Security Zones, reduction of military from the North and East, the attackers of religious place to be investigated, etc. is deplorable.

by S. V. Kirubaharan

( September 27, 2015, Paris, Sri Lanka Guardian) Since the end of the war in Sri Lanka, there have been four resolutions passed in the UN Human Rights Council – UN HRC. The first of these resolutions was initiated soon after the ‘end of the war’ on 26 May 2009, by Sri Lanka itself with the help of India. This resolution was described as ‘Machiavellian’ by diplomats and civil society. Sri Lanka implemented none of its recommendations. At the time when it was passed in the HRC, the US was not a member.

Since the US became a member of the HRC in June 2009, matters concerning Sri Lanka began moving in the right direction. This resulted in three consecutive resolutions – in 2012, 2013 and 2014. Ample time and space was given, therefore, by the international community or the members of the HRC, for Sri Lanka to set up and conduct a dometic inquiry into allegations of war crimes and crimes against humanity. Also, there has been plenty of time to implement their own recommendations of the so-called ‘Lessons Learnt and Reconciliation Commission’ – LLRC.

As we consider the content of these resolutions, we recall how India, which is part of the international community, signed an accord with Sri Lanka in 1987 (Indo-Lanka accord), and that this was purely due to the burning ethnic conflict. While China, Pakistan, Russia and Cuba actively harm the victims in Sri Lanka, the country which signed an accord to maintain peace and security is mute! The fact that a country which claims to be a regional super-power allows China and Pakistan to be more active in affairs concerning Sri Lanka, especially the Tamils, is not acceptable. We hope India does not expect victims to line up behind either China or Pakistan!

India decision-makers should be courageous enough to break their long silence on Sri Lanka.

Sri Lanka is a co-sponsor!

After the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights-cum-OISL released a comprehensive report on Sri Lanka on 16th September, all countries in favour of human rights, democracy and good governance cannot possible let Sri Lanka off the hook any longer. Nevertheless, the pending resolution has gone through many difficulties and criticisms before taking its shape!

The way China and Pakistan are taking initiative on Sri Lanka, the international community must think twice whether there has been any change in the foreign policy of the new government. It cannot be denied that, from the President to the Cabinet, it is old wine in a new bottle.

Anyhow since 2012, three consecutive resolutions have been successfully passed with the initiative of the US. When we compare the 4th resolution with the previous three, it is clear that Sri Lanka has a better say in the pending one, because of US and Indian interest in Sri Lanka. Even though the present government is amenable to US and India, it has not completely isolated China and Pakistan. Counties like China, Cuba, Pakistan and Russia maintain the same position as they did when earlier resolutions were being passed on Sri Lanka. During the informal discussions on the draft resolution, Sri Lankan representatives were adamant about deleting almost fifteen paragraphs and they persuaded amendments to paragraphs wherever there were terminologies like ‘accountability’, ‘implementation’, ‘investigate’, ‘violation’, etc. This surprised many including the group of co-sponsors – US, UK, Macedonia and Montenegro.

Concern to protect the military

Surprising in itself, is the fact that Sri Lanka is a co-sponsor of a resolution that is meant to be addressing its own serious human rights violations and war crimes! No wonder that it has been watered down, and there even seems more concern about protecting the reputation of the military than of identifying and indicting the perpetrators.

Countries like Belgium, Canada, Ireland, Netherlands, Norway and Switzerland did not agree with the Sri Lankan position. These countries were for a hybrid court. Switzerland repeatedly insisted that ‘hybrid’ should be mentioned in the resolution.

The US ambassador’s point was that they found it difficult to accommodate ‘hybrid’ because many have not understood the term. Therefore his suggestion was to use ‘international investigators’. We can see something of this with ‘Commonwealth Judges, Lawyers and Prosecutors’. But this has not satisfied some legal experts who say this still is a ‘domestic’ process.

Those who are critical of the present draft should attend future sessions of the HRC to learn and understand the pulse, politics, and approach of the members. They would also be very welcome to counter the position of China, Pakistan, Russia and Cuba.

To be frank, the present draft is not satisfactory, it doesn’t go far enough. But there is no other way forward. The investigation has to start somewhere. If there is no resolution on Sri Lanka in this 30th session, there may not be any until March 2017.

Until last Tuesday, Sri Lanka’s position regarding the draft resolution was very confusing. The proposed amendments by Sri Lanka’s representatives have no connection to the speech made by Sri Lanka Minister of External Affairs in the Council on 14th September. Anyone who listened to his speech might well have thought that in weeks or months, Sri Lanka will be ‘Heaven for human rights’. Let Sri Lanka show this through genuine and honest practice. Not empty words.

Government of National Unity!

Last week, the way Sri Lanka was looking at the first draft of the resolution, many presumed that one regime violates and the next regime justifies – in order to protect the perpetrators! We learned that Sri Lanka deliberately brought those deletions and amendments with ulterior motives in the informal meetings.

It is truly laughable that Sri Lankan representatives were informing other states in the HRC that the pending resolution may harm reconciliation! Can Sri Lanka give a single example of concrete steps taken since last January, on reconciliation? The 19th amendment is not a good example because the continuation of the present Government of national unity is at stake.

One cannot ignore the fact that many MPs are crossing over from the so-called Government of national unity to the opposition. This will undermine the boasting by the Sri Lanka Minister in the HRC that they appointed the Tamil National Alliance – TNA as the leader of the opposition. It looks like this is going to come to an end in the near future.

According to one of the MPs, from the South, this opposition leadership was given to the TNA precisely so the government could make use of it for their international propaganda. Let us wait and see the reality in a few weeks or months.

No-one can deny the fact that the resolutions on Sri Lanka came out of the ashes of Mullivaigzhal and the North and East.

We all know that geo-politics and economic interests play games in all situations including from Afghanistan to Libya and Syria!

Diaspora organisations

Sri Lanka’s claims that they are working with Diaspora organisations is not true!

I am not denying that they work with a few individuals and a diaspora organisation which doesn’t work with the masses. In fact, this is a drop in the ocean. This is where countries like Switzerland, Norway and South Africa are making mistakes. These countries fail to consider the realities of diaspora organisations.

For example organisations like the Tamil Centre for Human Rights – TCHR which has been in existence for more than two decades and works purely on human rights, has been side-lined by these countries. Some say that a newcomer has set the scene in a few countries that they are the ones who should be consulted by countries promoting reconciliation in Sri Lanka! If anyone believes this and works in this way, there will be no acceptable and durable solution to the ethnic conflict in Sri Lanka.

The importance of not setting ourselves up to fail

September 27, 2015

This Thursday’s consensus resolution tabled before the United Nations Human Rights Council in relation to Sri Lanka’s war time atrocities has provoked starkly divergent responses in its aftermath.

Calling for a more nuanced discussion

On the one hand, we have the government patting itself on the back for having successfully negotiated the diluting of the earlier call ‘to involve international investigators, prosecutors and judges in Sri Lanka’s justice processes.’ Softer language is now resorted to. Thus the relevant paragraph ‘affirms’ the importance of participation in a ‘Sri Lankan judicial mechanism’, including the Special Counsel’s office, of Commonwealth and other foreign judges, defence lawyers, and authorized prosecutors and investigators.

On the other hand, skeptics have scoffed that this is all a matter of words. Certainly the Bard’s injunction as to ‘whats’ in a name? that which we call a rose, by any other name would smell as sweet,’ ill suits this particular controversy. Those inclined to look askance at the consensus resolution will indisputably not consider as sweet, the bringing in of a ‘hybrid court’ couched in more pleasing language as it were.

But at a more substantial level, the polarized nature of debates around this question is worrying. The two extremes hitherto apparent of hysterical bellowing on state sovereignty juxtaposed with the uncritical accepting of a ‘domesticated hybrid court’ as the ideal answer to Sri Lanka’s accountability question must yield to a far more nuanced discussion.

Bringing in expertise from overseas

Wriggling on the horns of an unenviable dilemma created by the preposterous arrogance of the Rajapaksa Presidency in treating its own citizens as disposable commodities, this Government has shifted uneasily from one foot to another, at one time pointing to experts assisting past Commissions of Inquiry. The SWRD Bandaranaike Commission (1963) is an oft quoted example where a judge of the Court of Appeal of Ghana and a judge of the Court of Cassation, United Arab Republic sat on the Commission itself along with T.S. Fernando, judge of the Supreme Court of Sri Lanka.

In those far quieter times, barring the occasional assassination as it were, the incorporation of foreign judges was not so heavily weighted with nationalistic sentiment and fear of international agendas. Rather, it was simply felt that on matters of intense national passion, objective minds may be of help. As an aside, it may also be noted that post-independent Ceylon ranked several foreign citizens on its apex Court including a distinguished Chief Justice, Sir Alan Rose (1961-1956) who was a British citizen. It may be as a hangover to these times that neither of the two Republican Constitutions (1972 and 1978) expressly stipulates that a judge must be a Sri Lankan citizen, quite unlike the Indian Constitution. Judges however have to swear the common oath of allegiance to the Sri Lankan Constitution.

More recently, foreign experts have assisted the Udalagama Commission of Inquiry (2006) and participated in the extended inquiry of the Paranagama Commission of Inquiry (2014). That said, these are fact-finding Commissions of Inquiry (COIs) which are recommendatory in nature. No immediate penal consequences follow. Indeed one much critiqued aspect has been the absolute lack of nexus which exists between findings of these Commissions and actual criminal prosecutions. In response thereto, the Commissions of Inquiry Act (1948) was amended some years ago so as to enable the Attorney General to act on COI recommendations. Regardless to say, this was not a solution to the problem, given the highly subverted nature of the Office of the Attorney General itself.

Making sure that reforms deliver justice
But in contrast to fact-finding COIs, ‘a Sri Lankan judicial mechanism’ as envisaged in the draft UNHRC resolution is a far different creature vested with judicial power to issue penal sanctions. The question is as to what ‘participation’ as specified in the draft consensus resolution actually means? The devil will be in the details. As observed in last week’s column spaces, the differences in expectations may come back at some point to bite Sri Lanka in the derriere as it were.

Assistance rendered by Commonwealth or foreign judges (incidentally one is at a loss to distinguish between the two) may indeed be imperative given the institutional breakdown that we see now. But if this is interpreted as a hands-on involvement of foreign judges, this may involve an exemption from taking the oath of allegiance to the Constitution which Sri Lankan judicial officers are bound by. The likelihood of an international judge sitting on a domestic ‘judicial mechanism’ after swearing to uphold the Constitution, (despite the objection often raised By the United Nations that the Constitution privileges emergency law over constitutional protections) is surely somewhat far-fetched. Further, the ordinary procedures applicable to appeal may need to be dispensed with. These are potentially highly emotive disputes.

Clearly however, whatever is put in place will need to be approved under and by Sri Lankan law. Nonetheless, there are pitfalls ahead if the boundaries are pushed more recklessly than what is strategically safe at this political juncture. Quite apart from the delight that ultra-nationalists will display at this boon of a ‘domesticated’ hybrid court’ to their flagging campaign, local judges who have struggled against overwhelming odds to perform honorably in office may find themselves pushed to the wall. Above all, the danger is that colossal sums of money may be spent but to no purpose. This is evidenced in Cambodia for instance where state-of-the-art ‘hybrid courts’ with ‘foreign’ judges of little repute have had minimum impact on improvement of the local justice process.

Facing difficult challenges ahead

We face difficult challenges ahead which need to be examined and understood. Whatever it may be, the rabble rousing rhetoric of the Rajapaksa pack must be eschewed. Such stupidities led us to this impossible quagmire in the first place. But reforms agreed to desperation which will set Sri Lanka up to fail, despite all good intentions, need to be steered clear of. Ultimately we must not be distracted from the task of establishing credible domestic systems motivated to redress long standing judicial and legal failures cross ethnic lines.

That must be the primary aim of the post-January 2015 nation-building exercise.

Why do ‘Hybrids’ oppose the Hybrid Court?

by Jude Fernando
- on 09/27/2015

“It is the power of hybridity that enables the colonized to challenge the ‘inherited boundaries of power and knowledge’. It breaks down the symmetry and duality of the self/Other, insider/outsider, and establishes alternative spaces of power and knowledge.” –Homi Bhabha

Why Do ‘Hybrids’ Oppose the Hybrid Court by Thavam Ratna

A hybrid court, but how strong will it be?

David Cameron promised survivors justice. Does this draft deliver?

Sri Lanka Campaign for Peace and Justice

The Governments of Sri Lanka, the United States, the United Kingdom, Montenegro, and Macedonia have published the text of a joint resolution which will form the basis of the follow up to the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights’ “OISL” report.

A Hybrid Court, But How Strong Will It Be by Thavam Ratna

Plus and Minus of The First 260 Days of the Current Government

by Dr A.C.Visvalingam, President, CIMOGG.-27/09/2015

The ninth day of January 2015 ended 10 years of naked ego-boosting, nepotism, corruption, waste, disregard for the Rule of Law, and confrontational government on a scale not seen before or since in this country. It also terminated five years of near-serfdom of the Sri Lankan people under the 18th Amendment. These developments are immeasurably huge pluses for the citizens of this country. Maithripala Sirisena played a highly risky and critical role in helping to effect this change with the indispensable support of Ranil Wickremesinghe. The citizens of this country have been enjoying the valuable fruits of their efforts for the past 260 days but have now begun expressing disappointment about inexplicable departures from their justified expectations. The Citizens’ Movement for Good Governance (CIMOGG) considers that an interim listing of the more important pluses and minuses relating to governance over this initial period would not be out of place now.

We start with a selection of pluses in no particular order.

Plus No. 1 – Members of the media have become much more venturesome and fearless in going after the truth than they have been able to do for a very long time. Much discussion of political issues is taking place without fear of being assaulted or snatched away in a white van, with fatal consequences thereafter.

Plus No. 2 – It is now possible to walk along our mostly pavement-deprived roads with a much reduced chance of being thrust aside into a drain by T56-waving security escorts that were not only provided to the President, the Prime Minister and Ministers but also to some senior administrators, military high-ups and family members of these exalted beings. Also, the misuse of State air and road transport resources for illegitimate purposes has lessened notably.

Plus No. 3 – In general, the Police are being given a free hand to investigate all types of crimes, in striking contrast to the situation for many decades past, especially the last 10 years.

Plus No. 4 – Confiscated lands have been released to their owners at a significantly faster rate than in the five years following the end of LTTE hostilities, removing a modicum of the heartburn that stands in the way of national reconciliation.

Plus No. 5 – Undertakings have been given to increase the budgetary allocations for education and health, which were not given the priority that they should have received after the decimation of the LTTE.

Plus No. 6 – The people appreciate the calm, quiet manner in which Sirisena presents his views and programs and his avoidance of rodomontade and bombast. They also value the comprehensive answers given by the PM in Parliament, in strong contrast to the drivel spouted by his recent predecessors.

Plus No. 7 – The members of the Constitution Council (CC) that is provided for in the 19th Amendment have now been installed. This should help achieve an improvement in the quality of future appointments to high level administrative posts.

Plus No. 8 – It was refreshing to learn that President Sirisena has just left for the USA by commercial airline, without causing millions of rupees loss to Sri Lankan Airlines or Mihin Air. Most gratifying of all is that he and his retinue totaled fewer than twenty persons.

Plus No. 9 – The poor attendance of a large number of MPs, amounting to gross dishonesty, has been a matter which CIMOGG has repeatedly abjured. It has been very encouraging to hear the strong measures which Wickremasinghe has threatened to implement to correct this dishonourable practice.

We now turn to several minuses.

Minus No. 1 – A substantial number of undesirables have got into Parliament because one-half of our population think that there is nothing wrong in giving their votes to candidates with atrocious records. By resigning themselves passively to the capricious will of the people, both Sirisena and Wickremasinghe have given respectability to these deplorable characters. During wartime, governments all over the world use the services of criminals for constructive purposes. As Sri Lanka may be said to be in a besieged state economically and internationally, the current accommodation may, at best, be considered to be of a parallel nature.

Minus No. 2 – Although the Police have been given a reasonably free hand to investigate criminal misuse of State assets, the public perception is that the Police, in many high-profile cases, seem to be hampered in their investigations both by a shortage of trained manpower and the paucity of political will to follow up on the profusion of scandalous revelations that the Auditor-General, our brave journalists and the untiring JVP keep on making without cease. Public disquiet is exacerbated by what citizens regard as the lukewarm and highly-delayed support given by the Attorney-General’s Department in a number of instances. It is only when more sound indictments are filed and followed up, and the disgraceful 4% rate of conviction achieved by the Department and the Police begins to rise rapidly to a more respectable level, that the public will re-consider their poor rating.

Minus No. 3 – The non-performance and conflicts of interest pertaining to the Bribery Commission (CIABOC) have been highlighted ad nauseam. Now that the Constitutional Council has got a fresh start, its first priority should be to appoint three persons of unquestioned competence and integrity to CIABOC and recruit more personnel for it who have the skills and the interest to expose the profusion of fraudsters whose files have not been investigated for years.

Minus No. 4 – The overwhelming greed of politicians, once elected to power, is to try to ensure that all real power is retained by them. Some of the indications given by the government regarding its thinking on a new Constitution are that the people’s sovereignty will be further eroded and the powers of Parliament increased. Even decisions regarding local matters will not be allowed to be taken by the people in any of the sub-governmental units. Instead, the MP for the area will be vested with the power to decide what is good for his electorate. The dispersal of funds will be largely at the will and pleasure of the MP, who will surely use it to extend patronage and benefits to his supporters at the expense of the rest. It is vital, therefore, that each electorate should be allocated funds the use of which must be initiated and approved by the people of that electorate. The relevant Pradeshiya Sabhas must be given the task of monitoring the dispersal of funds in accord with the relevant statutory requirements.

Minus No. 5 – Some of Sirisena’s decisions during the first 100 days left his supporters wondering a little. Now they are beginning to wonder much more. Gullible and generous-minded supporters attributed the steps initially taken by him to his shrewdness in making the best of a situation at a time when his political strength was not assured. However, after he manoeuvred himself, or was manoeuvred by others, to take up the presidency of the SLFP and the UPFA, a different picture is emerging. The majority of those who express an opinion on the subject are now convinced that Sirisena, who gave the welfare of Sri Lanka first priority at the beginning of his incumbency, has now relegated it to a lower status and promoted his party to the No.1 position in his list of prime concerns. The next few months of activity in Parliament will show the people whether the party or the country benefits more from his contributions.

Minus No. 6 – An early move made by Sirisena was to appoint one of his brothers to a very highly-paid position in Sri Lanka Telecom, whereas one could reasonably have hoped that a person with a superior knowledge of communications technologies would have inspired more confidence in the public and been better value for money.

Minus No. 7 – It was reported recently that Sirisena’s daughter had chaired a development meeting at Polonnaruwa even though she has no known official position. Was this not an infraction of the anti-nepotism platform which was a vital element in the last presidential election campaign?

Minus No. 8 – Dr Tilak Syambalapitiya and Mr G.A.D.Sirimal, both of whom have in-depth knowledge about Sri Lanka’a growing electrical power requirements and the CEB’s long-term plans to meet these, have issued grave warnings regarding the failure to get on with the construction of a large power plant. Owing to the delays already incurred (intentionally?), the CEB may be forced to go behind the private sector to meet the shortfall as happened when Norochcholai was bogged down by various vested interests. The private sector must be rubbing its hands in delightful expectation of windfall profits from any call that is made on them to fill the power deficit, which would be at mouth-watering rates that border on the extortionate.

The pluses and the minuses given above are intended to convey the flavour of what the public sees as the strengths and weaknesses of the Sirisena-Wickremasinghe partnership. We call upon both of them to adjust course appropriately.

– The island

A Message Of Hope Tempered With Reality

By Emil van der Poorten –September 27, 2015

Emil van der Poorten

The recent goings-on in Geneva where a skilled and suave diplomat of Jordanian origin, Zeid Ra’ad Al Hussein, has given Sri Lanka the opportunity to dig itself out of a moral grave of its own excavation is going to produce interesting fall-out.

Prior to the Jordanian presenting his report to the United Nations Council on Human Rights a few days ago, Mangala Samaraweera, our own Minister of Foreign Affairs (MFA) who has been a pleasant contrast to the buffoonery of some of his predecessors, particularly Rohitha Bogollagama, the antithesis of what the holder of such office should be, fired a pre-emptive salvo of good sense in the Swiss city.

Even though, it seemed to repeat a rather tired manthram of conciliatory sentiments in conciliatory language, it was a pleasant contrast to that which had preceded it in the Rajapaksa years: a litany of lies, obfuscations and undertakings that were deliberately ignored no sooner they were made.

Despite all of the above which seems to suggest that we could be on to a new highway of hope in foreign relations and, infinitely more important, a return to civility in the conduct of our own affairs, I cannot, in the cold light of day, believe that such a sea change is going to occur anytime soon and, even if it comes close to doing so, occurs without the spilling of more innocent and principled blood.

There is a classic dictum that the best way to anticipate future conduct is by reference to past behaviour and if any of the “movers and shakers” in Sri Lankan politics are to be analysed in no matter how cursory a manner, my pessimism should be easily comprehended (and accepted). Read More

Local judges only for local mechanism; Foreigners only as advisors- Ranil; probe even crimes of the south - civil organizations

(Lanka-e-News -27.Sep.2015, 7.00PM) The judges who will be associated with the local mechanism that is to be established to inquire into the crimes committed during the period of the war will comprise only local judges , and those of the foreign countries will only be functioning as advisors , Ranil Wickremesinghe the Prime minister (P.M.) elucidated when he met with civil organizations this evening at the Temple Trees to explain the Geneva resolutions .

About 200 trade union representatives , Professor Ven. Bellanvila Wimalaratne Thera and Sunil Rathnapriya of the citizens force participated in the conference. On behalf of the government ,ministers Rajitha Senaratne , Mano Ganeshan , Dr. Harsha De Silva were present.

Joseph Stalin of the Lanka Teachers union pointed out that the TNA had in its election manifesto mentioned it will settle for nothing less than an international investigation ,and the Tamil people voted for them because of that .Besides, just because Mohan Peiris was eliminated , the judiciary had not got cleansed .With an attorney general’s (A.G.)department that is steeped in corruption , is it possible to give a certificate inspiring confidence in the disgruntled and sceptical Tamil people with regard to the local mechanism? Stalin questioned.

The P.M. replied that after having discussions with all representatives of the Tamil people , the mechanism will be established with their consent and consensus.

Professor Bellanvila Thera expressing his assent to this commission said, it is something unprecedented in the world , and the truth shall be made known compulsorily.What the government is going to do should be conveyed to the people , he added.

Following the consent obtained of those present , a committee was appointed comprising ministers Dr. Rajitha Senaratne , Mano Ganeshan , Dr. Harsha De Silva , Professor Bellanvila Thera ,Sunil Rathnapriya , Chameera Perera and C.W. Subasinghe.

A mojority of the representatives of civil organizations empahasized , not only the incidents during the war , but even the abductions , murders and setting fire to media Institutions in the South exploiting the war climate should also be investigated .They also insisted that the reports of the committees that inquired into the Rathupaswela murders , and others should be published , and those guilty be duly punished.

---------------------------
by (2015-09-27 13:41:21)