SRI LANKA/WORLD – Torture is a common practice in Sri Lanka – UN Special Rapporteur on torture

Basil Fernando / AHRC

May 13, 2016

The UN Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment or punishment Mr Juan E Mendez, published his preliminary findings on 7th May 2016 following an official visit to Sri Lanka. He has observed that torture is a common practice in Sri Lanka and structural reforms are required to prevent it. In concluding remarks he states, “…The current legal framework and the lack of reform within the structures of the armed forces, police, Attorney-General’s Office and judiciary perpetuate the real risk that the practice of torture will continue. Sri Lanka needs urgent measures adopted in a comprehensive manner to ensure structural reform in the country’s key institutions. A piecemeal approach will not be compatible with the soon-to-be-launched transitional justice process and could undermine it before it really begins.”

Findings

In his findings he states that “…I am persuaded that torture is a common practice carried out in relation to regular criminal investigations in large majority by the Criminal Investigation Department (CID) of the police…., he goes on to state that “...Fewer cases are reported today than during the conflict period and perhaps the methods used by the police forces are at times less severe. But sadly the practice of interrogation under physical and mental coercion still exists and severe forms of torture, albeit probably in less frequent instances, continues to be used...,” and that “… Both old and new cases continue to be surrounded by total impunity.”

Then he makes the following observations based on testimonies from victims and detainees whom he and his team of forensic experts have met.

“…I received many testimonies from victims and detainees who took the risk to speak out, despite concerns either for their own safety or their families. I was able to conduct thorough interviews and forensic examinations in a few cases, with the assistance of a forensic expert that accompanied me during my mission. I found the testimonies truthful and many were substantiated with physical evidence that is conclusive of torture. The forensic expert conducted a number of medical examinations that confirmed physical injuries consistent with the testimonies received. The forensic expert also analysed photographs taken shortly after the alleged torture and ill-treatment, and concluded they are diagnostic of severe physical torture.

The nature of the acts of torture consists mainly of transitory physical injuries caused by blunt instruments (essentially punches, slapping and, occasionally, blows with objects such as batons or cricket bats) which heal by themselves without medical treatment and leave no physical scars. There were also several accounts of brutal methods of torture, including beatings with sticks or wires on the soles of the feet (falanga); suspension for hours while being handcuffed, asphyxiation using plastic bags drenched in kerosene and hanging of the person upside down; application of chili powder to face and eyes; and sexual violations including mutilation of the genital area and rubbing of chili paste or onions on the genital area. While these methods of torture were in some cases of short duration, in other cases torture occurred over a period of days or even weeks during interrogation.”

PTA and the failures of the Magistrates

The UN Special Rapporteur observes that under Section 15(a) of the Prevention of Terrorism Act, some detainees continues to be detained in TID facilities, as they are considered by the Secretary of the Defence as a threat to national security. He observes the following regarding the hearings before the Magistrates. “…The hearings held before a magistrate, for the purpose of judicial control of the detention, do not amount to meaningful safeguards against either arbitrariness or ill treatment. The magistrates essentially rubber-stamp detention orders made by the Executive Branch and do not inquire into either conditions of detention or potential ill-treatment in interrogation. ”

The Rapporteur has conducted random interviews of defendants held under the PTA, or under charges of ordinary offences for over ten years in remand detention and others sent to ‘rehabilitation’ in lieu of prosecution which is supposedly voluntary on their part. He goes on to state, that “…Obviously, if after many years of detention the State does not have sufficient evidence to charge a detainee, the latter should be released unconditionally.”

The Rapporteur recommends that, “…The Government should repeal the current PTA. In the context of any replacing legislation, if at all necessary, a robust and transparent national debate should take place that provides for full participation of civil society. We understand that the Government is contemplating statutes on National Security, surveillance and intelligence services. Under any circumstance, those pieces of legislation should include protections against arbitrary arrest, absolute prohibitions on torture or cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment, provisions for access to legal counsel from the moment of deprivation of liberty, strong judicial controls over law enforcement or security agencies, and protections for the privacy rights of citizens. The Special Rapporteur on Human Rights while Countering Terrorism has produced very useful guidelines to incorporate in legislation of this sort. …”

The Rapporteur also expresses concerns about the allegations he has received recently of the so called ‘white van abductions”, and about the absence of clear rules in the law that says arrests have to be authorised by a judge. He further, observes, “…In practice the decision to arrest a person is made by a police officer. For that reason, it is important that detentions are made transparent, with proper identification of the arresting officer, and offering reasons based on objective evidence. Otherwise, distrust of the authorities will persist. ”

The Rapporteur then goes on to make his observations on the reasons that may lead to the practice of torture and observes that, the Sri Lankan criminal justice system and investigation practices that somehow may indirectly incentivise the use of torture. He observes “…The first is the role of confessions of suspects in criminal investigations, which currently seems to be the primary tool of investigation for the police. The need to extract a confession in order to build a case is in itself a powerful incentive to use torture. A second aspect is the practice of conducting the investigation while the suspect is in custody, rather than determining the detention based on preliminary investigations. Authorities have on a regular basis justified prolonged detention on the ground that the investigation was complex, or evidence hard to find, ignoring the fact that, outside of detentions in flagrante delicto, the evidence should be procured before the arrest. This access to the detainee for continuous questioning can also be an incentive for torture, aside from other considerations regarding conditions and legality of detention…”

The Rapporteur states that the Attorney General told the UN delegation that the statements made to the police do not form part of the criminal record in ordinary crime cases, though he acknowledged that under the PTA, statements made to a Senior Police Officer, are fully admissible in Court. He states further that in both cases, police routinely extracts self-incriminatory statements so the admissibility or not of the statements does not protect the detainee from possible coercion. In any case, the PTA provision is in direct contradiction with the obligation under the Conventions against torture to exclude all declarations made under torture.

Rapporteur then directs his observations regarding faultiness of the rules relating to the access to lawyers. The accused provides a statement to the police as routine practice and is never informed about the right to a lawyer. This according to the Rapporteur, amounts to an inadequate and meaningless legal protection, which fuels the widespread fear and mistrust of the police system among the population. He recommends “ …It would be important to establish a clear rule that persons must have access to a lawyer from the moment of deprivation of liberty. A current proposal to amend the Criminal Procedure Code that includes access to counsel only after a statement is taken by the police in the initial 24 hours of detention is not appropriate to effective assistance of counsel and would, therefore, violate due process.”

Judicial oversight of police action is superficial

The Rapporteur in examining the role of the judiciary and the prosecutors finds fault with the prevalent practices in Sri Lanka regarding their dual obligations of prevention and accountability. He states “… A modern accusatory system begins with affording more guarantees for the defendant. In it the public prosecutor is first and foremost the guardian of legality. Prosecutors must enforce the law against criminals but should also actively prevent miscarriages of justice by way of torture and manipulation of evidence, and intervene early on in the process. The accusatory system is more conducive than the inquisitorial system for the respect for human rights; but in its modern form it gives a lot of power but also heightened responsibility to prosecutors. ..”

He points out that judges and prosecutors should take it upon themselves as a matter of legal obligation to consider bail for lesser and non-violent offences and that they should ensure medical examination of the suspects so as to exclude any suspicion of mistreatment while in custody. They should initiate prosecutions to whosoever might be responsible for torture and mistreatment including superiors who may have tolerated and condoned such acts, ensuring that investigations, detentions interrogations arrests and conditions of incarceration takes place within the framework of rule of law.

Deficient and pronounced overcrowding in places of detention

The Rapporteur goes on to observe that there are serious defects relating to detention which results in acute lack of adequate sleeping accommodation, extreme heat, and insufficient ventilation, limited access to medical treatment, recreational activities and educational opportunities. He states that “…These combined conditions constitute in themselves a form of cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment…”

Regarding over-crowding he refers to his visits to prisons where he observed level of population exceeding capacity by well over 200 – 300 percent.

“…Vavuniya Remand Prison offered a striking example of such overcrowding. One of its halls hosted 170 prisoners in what my team and I estimated to measure less than 100 square meters, providing less than 0.6 metres per person. In the same building, other prisoners were forced to sleep on the staircase for lack of space in the detention areas. In addition, we saw cells designed for one person occupied by four or five inmates. The larger prisons in Colombo were built in the mid-19th century and walls, roofs and staircases are literally crumbling on the prisoners. The Government has indicated that Welikada prison will be closed and a new prison will be built in Tangalle, but we understand the latter is not even in the planning stages yet. While replacement of old prisons is a good idea, in the meantime it is urgent to conduct maintenance and repair the unsafe conditions that amount to cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment or punishment. …”

Defects in torture prosecution and provisions for fundamental rights

Talking about the Torture Act that came into effect in 1994, he observes that there had been only a few prosecutions. In the prison system there is no formal complaint mechanism available to inmates to make complaints about torture and ill treatment, or any other matter. The complaint mechanisms available against the police is also inadequate. He makes the following comments on the fundamental rights provisions.

“…Fundamental rights applications involve complex litigation and are thus not accessible to all. They are subject also to a 30-day term to file from the occurrence of the violation. In addition, even if successful, they result in compensation as the only remedy. The application is not available, for example, to vacate a court order that has been based on a forced confession, as it does not lie against judicial decisions. ..”

Impunity and lack of accountability

Like the previous Rapporteurs, who have observed the prevailing practice of impunity in Sri Lanka, the present Rapporteur also finds that “…Acts of torture that occurred in the past have been well documented. The Government has an obligation to investigate, prosecute and punish every incident of torture and ill-treatment, even if it happened in the past, because under international law prosecution of torture should not be time barred. The State also has the obligation to prevent such occurrences in the present, and the most obvious preventive measure is forceful prosecution of cases reliably reported.

Sri Lanka has a Victim and Witness Protection Act but potential beneficiaries complain that protection is ultimately entrusted to the police which, in most cases, is the agency that they distrust. The Government should consider amending the Act in order to make it more effective and trustworthy. ..”

The Rapporteur will make a more detailed report on these matters to the United Nations’ Human Rights Council at its 34th Session to be held in March 2017.

A scathing critique

The findings of the UN Rapporteur on torture and other cruel and inhuman degrading treatment or punishment, is a scathing critique of Sri Lanka’s failure to carry out its obligation to prevent torture and ill treatment. This Rapporteur’s findings demonstrates that the Government of Sri Lanka, fails to honour the basic obligation to prevent torture and ill treatment despite of many promises it has given to various UN bodies, including the Human Rights Council.

Sri Lanka seems to be trapped within extremely defective criminal justice system that cannot do away with torture and ill treatment. The investigators, prosecutors, and also the judiciary have not made an adequate attempt to overcome the defects of the criminal justice system. None of these institutions have shown a demonstrable will to end this universally condemned practice of torture and ill treatment. On the other hand the Government has failed to provide the necessary resources to undo the defects of a backward system. Therefore, Sri Lanka will continue to be condemned in international forums for its lack of will to develop a criminal justice system to be in keeping with its international obligations.

The franchise and democracy – In theory and practice

by Dr U.Pethiyagoda.-May 13, 2016, 7:26 pm 

The Universal Declaration of Human Rights and our Constitution declare the exercise of the franchise as a basic and inalienable right. Many writers have extolled it as a considerable virtue and a treasured right to be zealously guarded. Is it in fact so? Universal franchise is supposedly the ultimate blessing. This is presented as a self-evident truth – but as with many such, it could be grievously wrong. Practice, assuredly, should match theory.

The vote and democracy are inextricably linked. The latter, of course, is said to be the ultimate achievement in governance – in theory. This is the sanctioned management of our affairs. Churchill is reported to have remarked: "Democracy is the worst form of government except all the others that have been tried". A terse definition of democracy is "the control of an organisation or group by a majority of its members". This presumes that the majority of its members knows best what is good for it. Evidence may argue against such a presumption. As H. L. Mencken would have it: "Democracy is a pathetic belief in the collective wisdom of individual ignorance."

A majority is the consequence of a vote. What does this majority mean? If a population is assessed in terms of any attribute – height, weight, income, education, character, intelligence or any other and presented as a graph, the figures arrange in a bell-shaped curve – commonly symmetrical. This means that the extremes are poorly represented while the larger number occupy the middle. Thus, in an elected population, the chances are that the discerning and the irresponsible, the brilliant and the stupid are all small in number. The moderates are more. Therefore, a majority by itself does not reflect the ideal. More seriously, the representation veers towards the mediocre and will progressively tend towards deterioration.

Since capability and competence are not important considerations, educational and integrity levels are severely wanting in elected legislatures. Maybe, we do not yet have geniuses or lunatics as a result, but progressive deterioration is all but inevitable. Simultaneously by increasing the perks of office, significantly more obnoxious characters will be attracted.

As some remedy, the ideas of a Senate or of National List Members was conceived to bring in talented but reluctant worthies into the all important tasks of State Craft. Few worthy concepts have been so brazenly, vulgarly, opportunistically, selfishly and obscenely misused. The razor has been in monkey hands! Proffered excuses for this gross aberration are no more than feeble!

Equal Choice                              Read More

Readout of the Meeting of U.S. Permanent Representative to the United Nations Ambassador Samantha Power and Former Sri Lankan President Chandrika Bandaranaike Kumaratunga

May 11, 2016
U.S. Permanent Representative to the United Nations Ambassador Samantha Power met with former Sri Lankan President Chandrika Bandaranaike Kumaratunga, currently Chairperson of Sri Lanka’s Office of National Unity Reconciliation (ONUR), and Mano Tittawella, Secretary-General for Coordinating Reconciliation Mechanisms, on May 11, 2016, at the Sri Lankan Mission to the United Nations in New York.  

Ambassador Power reiterated U.S. support for Sri Lanka’s reconciliation efforts. She and Chairwoman Kumaratunga discussed the work and plans of the ONUR and the challenges and critical importance of bridging old divides and reconciling with the past. Ambassador Power described the moving experiences she has had in Sri Lanka meeting with the families of disappeared and missing people, and they discussed the work of the Office of Missing Persons, including its efforts to consult broadly across Sri Lankan civil society and minority communities.

They also discussed the importance of accountability. Ambassador Power emphasized the necessity of addressing human rights abuses and urged that transitional justice efforts move forward as soon as possible. She urged that any mechanism be accompanied by proactive outreach to keep the public informed and engaged. They spoke about the challenges ahead and timelines along which progress would be made.

Finally, they also discussed the Sri Lankan government’s ongoing efforts to counter corruption and overcome the economic challenges left behind by the previous government. They agreed on the urgent importance of delivering a “democracy dividend” to the Sri Lankan people and stressed the importance of U.S.-Sri Lankan bilateral efforts to support trade and economic growth.

Why India’s Big Push for Economic Cooperation in Lanka May Backfire

New Delhi’s policy of hustling its smaller neighbour comes at a time when the Wickremesinghe government’s mismanagement of the economy is apparent and will end up helping the xenophobic political forces in the country.

File photo of Sri Lanka’s Prime Minister Ranil Wickremesinghe and former president Mahinda Rajapaksa. Credit: Ishara K.

BY AHILAN KADIRGAMAR ON 11/05/2016

New Delhi’s relations with Colombo may appear to be at a high point but ironically, anti-India sentiments are on the rise in Sri Lanka. This divergence in sentiments between the Sri Lankan government and its population is largely a consequence of moves to liberalise trade in services and investment between the two countries.

It is no secret that there was a major sigh of relief in India and the United States following the regime change in Colombo in January 2015. China’s inroads into the country with the Rajapaksa regime had polarised the region and raised the geopolitical stakes. However, Sri Lanka’s relationship China was built on an economic foundation of large investments in infrastructure. It also has a historical basis from the rubber rice deal during the Korean War to the massive Bandaranaike Memorial International Conference Hall in Colombo, gifted by the Chinese in the early 1970s. Nevertheless, in India’s efforts to ensure its regional dominance and counter China’s influence, there has been a singular focus on trying to lock Sri Lanka into the Indian economic orbit.

Expanding trade and financial agreements

The India-Sri Lanka Free Trade Agreement of 1998 was followed by efforts towards a Comprehensive Economic Partnership Agreement (CEPA) to liberalise trade in services and investment starting in the mid-2000s.

However, the CEPA negotiations dragged on for nearly a decade in the face of increasing opposition within Sri Lanka, particularly by the business community and certain interest groups such as the medical lobby. With the new momentum in closer bilateral ties last year, India is pushing for a new trade pact called the Economic and Technological Cooperation Agreement (ETCA). The pro-liberalisation government of Prime Minister Ranil Wickremesinghe has been actively championing the proposed trade pact.

Meanwhile, the deterioration of the Sri Lankan economy in recent months – including a major balance of payments problem – has forced Colombo to seek support from external actors. India has boosted Sri Lanka’s foreign reserves by US$ 1.1 billion with a Reserve Bank of India credit swap for six months drawn last September, followed by a further emergency credit swap in March to wade over the tough financial tide.

The credit swap is a temporary measure to increase Sri Lanka’s forex reserves, until the country receives an IMF loan. The IMF’s extended fund facility of US$ 1.5 billion coupled with US$ 650 million in multilateral and bilateral loans are to take effect in June this year. The government believes these loans will create momentum for further global financial flows into the country.

The ETCA, widely perceived by the Sri Lankan public to be advantageous to India, is likely to become a trade-off for economic and political support from India to the Wickremesinghe government. However, Wickremesinghe’s visit to Beijing last month has strengthened relations with China – a shift from the soured relations which followed the defeat of the Rajapaksa regime last year. The possibility of equity swaps, where Sri Lankan debt to China is traded for financial stakes in Sri Lankan enterprises, is now being considered. Sri Lanka has also initiated negotiations with China and the US on new free trade agreements. Seizing this opportunity, the IMF and the World Bank are also pushing to liberalise trade as part of a larger strategy of liberalising the Sri Lankan economy – from encouraging the privatisation of state owned enterprises to labour reforms.

Reactions to ETCA

Many of the Colombo-based neoliberal think tanks see the Wickremesinghe government in power and the crisis facing the economy as an opportunity to accelerate liberalisation, including in trade. However, the ETCA is coming under considerable fire from a range of interest groups and political parties – from the chauvinistic remnants of the Rajapaksa regime to the ‘left’ opposition Janatha Vimukthi Perumana.

So what fuels this tremendous reaction to the ETCA? After all, the agreement is only one part of this liberalisation push. To start with, the trade picture is not pretty. According to the Central Bank, Indian exports to Sri Lanka were US$ 4,268 million while Lankan exports to India stood at just US$ 643 million in 2015 – reflecting a massive trade deficit between the countries.

There have been various explanations put forward by Indian officials and pro-liberalisation advocates in Colombo on what has been gained with the previous free trade agreement, including claims that the high Indian exports to Sri Lanka are mostly independent of the free trade agreement. However, India’s eagerness for the trade pact and the stark trade deficit is difficult to miss.

In this context, the current economic crisis and the neoliberal economic policy trajectory have become the political ground for the mobilisation of forces opposed to the government. And this campaign has zeroes in on the ETCA as the catch-all word to describe any and all impending economic woes. Political forces and middle class interest groups such as doctors and IT professionals are opposing the agreement and mobilising broader sections of society. Furthermore, these forces have assumed a xenophobic character, propagating anti-Indian sentiments.

Recent economic crisis

Much of the current economic woes in Sri Lanka have been inherited from the Rajapaksa government’s economic development policies of construction-led growth on high interest debt. In addition, the deterioration in global economic conditions over the past year have created difficult financial conditions for Sri Lanka to roll over such debt. However, the Wickremesinghe government needs to take part of the blame for mismanagement and certainly for its flawed economic vision.

Having come to power over a year ago, and having crossed the milestone of the parliamentary election in August 2015, it nevertheless chose to continue on the path of further exposing the economy to international debt in its November 2015 budget. It ignored the warning bells about the increasing import bill and falling revenues, which have made the country far more susceptible to the current crisis conditions of capital flight from the emerging markets and increasing cost of capital in the global financial markets.

At the core of the Wickremesinghe government’s economic programme is the liberalisation of trade and capital flows; the trade agreements and the IMF facility reflect this economic vision. In other words, it is counting on enticing inward capital flows despite the winds of global capital blowing in the opposite direction. Worryingly, even trade agreements in services and investment are known to lead to further speculative investment flows into finance, insurance and real estate, rather than traditional forms of foreign direct investment leading to the building of factories for production and exports. However, the Sri Lankan establishment has been satisfied with such fickle policies that also lead to considerable rent-seeking by the financial elite.

Opposing xenophobia and liberalisation

Trade liberalisation is always contentious for its impact on society, but it is all the more so now in the context of the global downturn and a national economic crisis. It is likely to aggravate the rising inequalities and jobless growth in Sri Lanka – by pushing for lower wages to compete in international markets – and the inflow of cheaper commodities, wiping out local production.

With the ETCA debate polarised between the free trade elite and the anti-Indian forces, there has been little informed debate including critical analysis of trade liberalisation, broader neoliberal reforms and the deteriorating global economic situation. For those bothered by xenophobia and economic marginalisation, the challenge is to oppose both the reflexive anti-Indian campaign of the nationalists and the neoliberal policies of the liberalisers.

In this context, New Delhi’s policy of hustling its smaller neighbour cannot be more ill-timed and is likely to generate a political backlash. The hubris of the Indian and Sri Lankan establishments in pushing through this trade pact may well result in losing the great opportunity that emerged last year of rebuilding Indo-Lanka relations on a broader footing.

Ahilan Kadirgamar is a political economist and a member of the Collective for Economic Democratisation in Sri Lanka (www.economicdemocratisation.org )

POLICE BLOCKS MEDIA COVERING FORMER MINISTER’S COURT APPEARANCE

14/05/2016

On 12th April when former Minister Basil Rajapaksa was produced in Mathara magistrate court in relation to a fraud case Assistant Police Superintendent Sudath Marasinhege blocked media personal covering the court proceedings, reports Sinhala language media. ASP Marasinhage has sent all journalists out of the court saying magistrate has ordered him to do so. But Magistrate has not issued such a order.

Now Prime Minister Ranil Wickremesinghe has directed IGP Pujith Jayasundera to investigate the incident.

According to reports the journalists had complained to senior DIG Chandana Wickramaratne who had assured them that he would also look into this matter, reports Daily Mirror.

How Does Our Media Cover Tragedy? An Open Letter to Sri Lankan Media Establishments

Photo Courtesy of The Massimo Group

SUBHA WIJESIRIWARDENA AND JAKE OORLOFF-on 05/11/2016

On 25 April 2016, two 19 year-old women were fatally hit by a train while attempting to cross a railway track in Dehiwala. The tragic incident quickly attracted the attention of the media, and journalists from every major domestic media outlet reported the incident, bringing to the nation and the world images and stories about the “tragic death of two friends”. The coverage included graphic CCTV footage of their last moments, sound bites from devastated parents and family, as well as those from a grief-stricken student body.

We write this letter as citizens who observed this tragedy via the local media; we are deeply concerned by the visible lack of principles and ethics for journalism in Sri Lanka, as displayed in the coverage of this recent event. We believe reportage of this incident has revealed the major ethical failings of our media.

As a people we have experienced and continue to experience numerous challenges – a war, a major natural disaster, and various ongoing social conflicts; we would think, as a nation, that we have by now developed a heightened level of sensitivity towards tragedy and conflict, and that we would see this reflected in our media. However, time and again, the Sri Lankan media, mainstream and otherwise, have displayed a troubling disregard for basic ethics, disappointing the public in our need for sensitivity. It has always been paramount to follow a framework of value-based ethics, which can guide the work of our journalists and media publishers; today the need is most urgent.

Overview of incident:

According to our observations, both print and electronic media coverage of this incident was problematic.

Many mainstream TV news channels televised in their first reports of the incident, actual CCTV footage without any attempt to censor the graphic nature of the images. This footage captured the actual point of contact between the victims and the train; in several reports, it was slowed down and replayed multiple times. The news reports of the events were then uploaded to social media networks including Facebook (and subsequently linked to respective Twitter accounts), and hosted on the media outlets’ respective channels on YouTube (the news reports including the CCTV footage were still available on many of these forums at the time of writing this letter.)

Print media printed false and unverified information in their reports, and carried contemptuous op-eds, which began a cycle of thoughtless victim-blaming.

This leaves us, as citizens of this country with a series of questions regarding the assumed role of the media in cases such as this, and the journalistic ethics we believe were flouted.

1. The editorial decision to televise this CCTV footage calls to question the commitment to sensitive reportage and exposes clear ethical issues.

• Did the editor/s consider the impact this graphic footage would have on the general public, and more importantly, on the families of the victims, for whom this remains a personal tragedy? Did the media consider what it might feel like to have the death of a loved one repeatedly televised?
• Were the families of the victims officially notified of the deaths before the broadcasting of the graphic footage?

2. The reportage could compromise genuine attempts to uncover the facts and is a clear display of irresponsible journalism.

• Was the CCTV footage of the accident released to the public by the media before the relevant law enforcement officials had an opportunity to review it? Does this compromise the integrity of a thorough investigation?
• Was this crucial bit of evidence released to the media by law enforcement officers or a third party? If the CCTV footage was released to the media by a third party, didn’t the media have a responsibility to support the investigation by not televising it?

3. The sensationalized reportage disregarded any respect for the privacy of the victims and their grieving families, and the community at large.

• We are aware that the photograph of the girls that was televised and printed was taken from a Facebook post uploaded by a grieving classmate, with a personal message attached.  The photo was taken without the expressed permission of the said Facebook user, nor were the wishes of the family considered in this matter.
• One report included a photo taken off one of the victim’s Instagram accounts, which was then used for an over-dramatized, fatalistic report. Camera crews visited the houses of the victims, televised the funeral, and images of grief-stricken parents. The street address and the house is clearly identifiable in the reports. In other reports, the camera crews even followed the procession to the cemetery and attempted to speak to family and friends there.

4. Did the media sensationalize the reportage to exploit a tragic event but fail in their basic duty to report facts?

• What was the true motivation behind releasing and then highlighting the graphic footage of the accident in a situation such as this? The media may justify the showing of graphic footage at times when a ‘truth’ needs to be exposed in service of the public. Cases of major human rights abuses, corruption etc. come to mind. However, in a case such as this, where the incident is an accidental death – what is the real purpose of this kind of reportage?
• In further attempts to sensationalize the tragedy, various media outlets interviewed ‘eyewitnesses’ the next day; these reports said that the young women had their earphones plugged into their ears at the time of the accident, and that this was the main cause of the fatality. The media used this unverified information and createdunnecessary, non-constructive discussions about the victims of the tragedy being responsible for their own deaths. Reports later surfaced through other media sources that this piece of information was not true; the doctor who performed the post-mortem on the bodies of the young women very clearly stated he found they were not wearing any devices; this fact was next verified by the driver of the train.
• The media resorted to op-eds with a righteous, moralistic tone, questioning   a) the ‘younger generation’s’ so-called obsession with technological devices, b) the victims choices, as young people and particularly as young women, in being out for a social gathering that night. Archaic, and indeed sexist ideas were promoted through these op-eds.
• The reports which carried the CCTV footage, along with the op-eds as mentioned above, incited the public to also respond in an insensitive manner. The reports were widely shared on social media forums such as Facebook, where the comments sections were alight with thoughtless, sometimes downright cruel banter about the victims being to blame for their own deaths.

Conclusion

We are concerned that the media has sought to actively contribute to a culture of morbid fascination towards tragedies at the cost of ethical and responsible journalism. This leaves us with the unfortunate conclusion that media outlets do this because perpetuating such a culture simply leads to increases in readership/viewership.

It is not unreasonable to assume that the media understands the power it has in shaping public opinion and a communities’ response. While we fully appreciate the complex duties journalists must balance when reporting on sensitive topics, we must demand as a public that the media is both more responsible and credible.

Some media outlets, upon being publicly questioned on the ethics behind broadcasting graphic footage, did remove the footage from some of the forums on which they have an official presence. But the removal of the footage did not occur across the boards, and to date, the footage is available on some mediums.

We urge all our media establishments to develop their own stringent guidelines and to practice sensitivity in all their work. We also urge them to generate awareness within their own communities on some key fundamental journalistic principles which are universally accepted and practiced.  There are also several resources the Sri Lankan press should use, which are specific to them, where codes of ethics have been set out:

Code of Professional Practice (Code of Ethics) of The Editors Guild of Sri Lanka and Free Media Movement Adopted by the Sri Lanka Press Institute

Sri Lanka Press Council Code of Ethics for Journalists

We urge all members to reflect on their own choices and those of their organization/s, and to contribute fruitfully to a lively discussion on the matter in an open and honest way. To generate a discourse in this spirit, we must also create a culture of peer-review, where members of the media can themselves provide and receive constructive criticism as a community. This community should itself lead the discourse on broader topics such as media rights and responsibilities. We are all responsible and we are all accountable.

Healing The Nation – A Question Of Leadership 

By Nihal Jayawickrama –May 13, 2016

Dr. Nihal Jayawickrama

I am deeply honoured by the invitation of the Lanka-Japan Friendship Society to deliver the Deshamanya Dr P.R. Anthonisz Memorial Lecture this evening. I was intrigued by the subject that was assigned to me, since a surgeon’s approach to healing a patient is usually to cut and remove a part of his or her anatomy. I wondered whether I was expected to advocate the same approach to healing the nation. Coming, as I do, from a family of lawyers, with only one doctor of medicine produced in several generations, it was my brother who knew and worked with Dr Anthonisz over many years. He mentioned to me that Dr Anthonisz, when 90 years old, had arrived late for a meeting of the Diabetes Association to which he had been invited, and explained that the delay was because he had to remove a patient’s gall bladder. He had said that he proposed to break the world record held by a Russian surgeon by removing another gall bladder after he reaches the age of 92. I do not know whether he achieved that distinction. Dr Anthonisz was one of a small group of brilliant surgeons of the 20th century that included Dr Noel Bartholomeusz and Dr M.V.P. Peries. I have had the good fortune never to have been subjected to Dr Anthonisz’s scalpel, but I have had the privilege of meeting him socially, often in the home of Felix and Lakshmi Dias Bandaranaike, and also elsewhere, and he always treated me with the utmost kindness. To the memory of that remarkable surgeon, I dedicate my own thoughts on the subject I propose to address, with respect and affection.

‘Healing the Nation – A question of leadership’ immediately raises the question: what is expected of a political leader in a democratic society? Should the leader reflect the views, the fears and the prejudices of the electorate to which he has to return for re-election; or should he determine a path according to his own vision, his own values and his own judgment, and endeavour to lead his electorate along that path? President Jayewardene ruminated on this issue some years after he had left office, and wondered how long one could go along with the wishes of the electorate. A military leader or a dictator does not have to worry about that, but a democratic leader has to because the electors are his main and only support. He recognized that it was very difficult to win an election again unless the leader continued to enjoy the continued support of those who had placed him in that position. However, he was willing to make an exception in regard to economic matters where external factors often determined what could or could not be done, however much that might displease the electorate. Incidentally, he had some sound advice for those aspiring to be leaders. Politics, he said, was a “stayers race”; a race where a man or woman who does not try to kick his neighbour or jump over him, but stays on till all the others disappear, wins the race. Therefore, he advised aspirants for political leadership that good health was vital: “look after your kidney, nurse your heart, eat little, don’t exercise too much, and in the end you win the stayer’s race and you become the leader”.

Read More

CASES AGAINST FORMER STATE TV HEAD PROF. ATHUGALA AND TWO OTHERS FIXED FOR TRIAL

14/05/2016

Four cases filed against former Sri Lanka Rupavahini Corporation (SLRC) Chairman Ariyaratne Athugala, its former Additional Director General Devapriya Abeysinghe and G.D. Sugathapala for allegedly threatening and assaulting four SLRC employees in 2010, were yesterday fixed for trial by the Colombo Chief Magistrate.

When the four separate cases were taken up before Chief Magistrate Gihan Pilapitiya, the cases were fixed for trial on August 29.

Four complainants Kanchana Marasinghe, Herbert Kumara Alagiyawanna, Ravi Abeywickrema and Gamini Pushpakumara alleged that they were threatened and assaulted by the suspects when they demanded them to be adhere with the Elections Commissioners guidelines in line with the Supreme Court order with regard to telecasting of election related programmes during the 2010 Presidential Election.

The complainants alleged that the former SLRC Chairman abused them in obscene language claiming that the President and he would not care about Supreme Court orders and no one needs to teach him about media.

Meanwhile, the Chief Magistrate directed the complainants to file a contempt of court action against the accused if required for allegedly criticizing the judiciary. The Chief Magistrate also reprimanded the police for their failure to take necessary legal action against the accused during the last five-year-period.

The Cinnamon Gardens Police took measures to bring these cases before Court since they were not settled in the Mediation Board.
Daily News

Old habits die hard for Mahinda


By Dharisha Bastians-Friday, 13 May 2016

Former President Mahinda Rajapaksa’s much-hyped trip to Uganda this week was plunged into controversy after documents emerged showing the former leader had requested the Government to pay his travel expenses and facilitate his visit to the African country.

The ex President was invited to attend the inauguration of the controversial Uganda President Yoweni Musaveni who was sworn into office for the fifth time this week after an election that the opposition claimed was rigged.

Daily FT is in possession of several documents proving that the Ministry of Foreign Affairs paid Rs. 425,000 for business class travel for the ex President from Colombo to Kampala, via Dubai. The ticket has been issued by World Air Pvt Ltd, a ticketing agency located on Havelock Road, Colombo 05, on 5 May 2016 in the name of RAJAPAKSA PERSY/M. The ticket has been invoiced to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs.


Highly placed sources at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs told Daily FT that the Ministry had only agreed to pay for the air ticket, and declined to bear costs for the former President’s accommodation.

 Rajapaksa and his entourage had booked rooms at the Speke Resort Munyonyo for the duration of their visit.

On 5 May, former MP Udith Lokubandara who currently serves as private secretary to former President Rajapaksa, wrote to the Secretary to the Minister of Foreign Affairs Chitranganee Wagiswara, asking the senior official to “facilitate for air ticket fares and other expenses” during the visit.

The same day, Lokubandara issued a second letter to Secretary Wagiswara, informing her that he would be accompanying Rajapaksa on the trip to Kampala, Uganda in his capacity as private secretary. “Please be kind enough to facilitate for expenses for food and lodging in Kampala from the 11th of May to the 15th of May as per government specified country regulations,” Lokubandara’s second letter tells Secretary Wagiswara.

Retired heads of state are not entitled to travel expenses unless they are travelling as a designated Government representative or envoy, official sources told Daily FT. Former President Kumaratunga had never been granted travel costs by the Sri Lankan Government for travel undertaken in her personal capacity as Chair of the South Asian Policy and Research Institute, a think tank based in Colombo or as a member of the World Leadership Alliance - Club de Madrid, her aides confirmed.

It remains unclear why any part of the former President Rajapaksa’s tour to Uganda was funded by the Government, when the letter of invitation from the Government of Uganda was sent directly to the office of the ex President. Ministry officials, speaking on grounds of anonymity said it could have been a matter of courtesy to a former head of state and as a gesture to Uganda, with which Sri Lanka maintains diplomatic ties.

Without an invitation extended to serving Government leaders, the personal invitation to former President Rajapaksa alone was practically a slight to the ruling administration, highly placed sources said.

The Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Republic of Uganda, in its letter dated 25 April 2016, extends the invitation for President elect Musaveni’s swearing in to: HIS EXCELLENCY MAHINDA RAJAPAKSA – FORMER PRESIDENT OF SRI LANKA.

Signed by Minister of State for Foreign Affairs in Uganda Oryem Henry Okello, the letter in Daily FT’s possession says Rajapaksa’s presence at President Museveni’s swearing-in ceremony would “provide an excellent opportunity to strengthen the warm and cordial relations between our peoples”.

“I have the honour, Your Excellency, to invite you to join HE the President and fellow Ugandans in witnessing the Swearing-in Ceremony and to celebrate with us the start of this new mandate. While looking forward to welcoming you in Kampala, please accept, Your Excellency, the assurances of my highest consideration,” the letter from Minister Okello said.

It is unclear if President Maithripala Sirisena, who is currently in London to attend the Anti-Corruption Summit, was extended a similar invitation.

The letter from the Uganda Government was not addressed to or through a Government party to the former President. There is no question therefore of Rajapaksa having attended the inauguration of the controversial Ugandan President as a representative of the Government, highly placed sources told Daily FT.

Meanwhile, a third letter issued to the Secretary of Foreign Affairs five days later, on 10 May, also by Lokubandara informs her about former President Rajapaksa’s ‘delegation’ that would be travelling to Kampala from 11 to 15 May 2016.

The nine-member delegation included former UPFA MP Gamini Lokuge, Udith Lokubandara, UPFA MP Lohan Ratwatte, and Dehiwala-Mount Lavinia Mayor Dhanasiri Amaratunga and two other individuals – Saman Udaya Amarashinghe and Hasitha Wickramarachchi. Two security personnel holding Official Passports (OL5650274 and OL5650273) issued by the Government – Neville Wanniarachchi and Mahendra Sampath – were also included in the delegation. Interestingly, the official letter to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs also reveals that Mayor Amaratunga is in possession of a diplomatic passport, a privilege not usually extended to municipal mayors. Amaratunga could be one of hundreds of diplomatic passport holders created during President Rajapksa’s tenure whose passports have yet to be recalled or cancelled. 

Lokubandara’s third letter said the former President would be travelling in a motorcade of four vehicles and two “Advance Vehicles” including one vehicle registered to the Army. “Please be kind enough to arrange airport protocol and other arrangements,” the letter tells Secretary Wagiswara.

Secretary Wagiswara declined to comment on the former President’s travel or confirm payment for his air ticket by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs.

But highly placed Ministry sources said Rajapaksa’s office had requested VIP lounge access and other arrangements for the entire delegation travelling to Kampala on 11 May.

Museveni’s swearing-in ceremony that President Rajapaksa attended was a highly controversial affair. Among the guests in attendance was Sudanese President Omar Hassan al-Bashir, who has outstanding warrants against him issued by the Hague-based International Criminal Court (ICC) for crimes against humanity. Diplomats from the US, EU and Canada marched out of the inauguration ceremony in protest at al-Bashir’s presence and Museveni’s own comments belittling the ICC during his speech. President Museveni has been in office since 1986. In 2001, his administration loosened the two-term limit in the Ugandan constitution to permit him to contest unlimited terms in office, a strong parallel with Rajapaksa himself whose 18th Amendment to the constitution in 2010 lifted the two-term limit on the presidency allowing him to contest an unprecedented third term in January last year.

During his tenure in office, former President Rajapaksa actively nurtured relationships with controversial world leaders and dictators, whose views about the US and other Western states resonated with his own. During his nine-year reign, Rajapaksa undertook official visits to Belarus, where he was warmly received by Alexander Lukashenko, dubbed the last dictator of Europe, travelled to Libya where he was famously pictured in embrace with Muamar Gaddafi, made a visit to Kazakhstan, and invited the polygamous Mswati III King of Swaziland, whose regime has been accused of gross human rights violations and torture, to Sri Lanka for a state visit.

He also actively cultivated strong personal and diplomatic relations with Iran’s former President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and former Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez. The alignment with states and world leaders associated with rights violations and authoritarian rule was part of the foreign policy pursued by the Rajapaksa administration in order to build a bloc of support against mounting calls from the West and the United Nations for accountability for alleged war crimes committed by the Government in the final stages of the war. - See more at: http://www.ft.lk/article/542074/Old-habits-die-hard-for-Mahinda#sthash.muYMS4df.dpuf

Mahinda given jolly tours by Maithi – Ranil regime

FRIDAY, 13 MAY 2016 

Information has been revealed that Kurunegala District UPFA Parliamentarian Mahinda Rajapaksa has assigned a five day tour enabling him to participate at the official ceremony of president’s inauguration.

Air tickets, accommodation and hotel facilities have been provided by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. Earlier it was claimed that the tour was a private affair of Mr. Mahinda Rajapaksa. Media had revealed that another group would join the tour midway. Meanwhile, Udayanga Weerathunga, the diplomat who is a close relative of Mr. Mahinda Rajapaksa and accused of providing weapons to anti-government guerrillas and suspected of causing the death of a Sri Lankan employed in the embassy too has joined Kurunegala Parliamentarian in the tour.

Gamini Lokuge, Lohan Ratwatte, Udithi Lokubandara, Sampath Mahendra, Neville Wanniarachchi, Amarasinghe Saman Udaya, Wickremearachchi Hasitha are among the group that consists of Kurunegala Parliamentarian Rajapaksa’s entourage.

Meanwhile it is reported that social media sites including Twitter, Facebook and Whatsapp were blocked in Uganda.  The main Ugandan opposition party, the Forum for Democratic Change (FDC), says it does not recognize President Museveni as the elected president. Ugandan opposition leader Kizza Besigye was arrested after he took oath of office as an alternative government a day before President Yoweri Museveni’s swearing-in. Clashes have erupted between supporters of Uganda's main opposition leader Kizza Besigye and security forces in Kampala after Besigye was arrested.