Veteran interviewer Larry King spoke to Stephen Hawking six years ago, where Hawking warned that humanity could be doomed through our own “greed and stupidity.” King spoke to Hawking again on Monday for Russia Todayto see if there’s been any progress on the self-destruction front, to which Hawking kicked off by saying: “We have certainly not become less greedy or less stupid.”
The world’s best-known theoretical physicist went on to lay out what he felt were the biggest threats to our species’ longevity. He continued to stress the threat of pollution and overpopulation, saying: “The population has grown by half a billion since our last interview, with no end in sight. At this rate, it will be eleven billion by 2100. Air pollution has increased by 8 percent over the past five years. More than 80 percent of inhabitants in urban areas are exposed to unsafe levels of air pollution.”
Once again, Hawking also highlighted the ever increasing threat of – you guessed it – artificial intelligence and the rise of the machine.
“Artificial intelligence has the potential to evolve faster than the human race. Beneficially AI could co-exist with humans.” But he went on to warn: “Once machines reach the critical stage of being able to evolve themselves, we cannot predict whether their goals will be the same as ours.”
However, it wasn’t all doom and gloom. Hawking finished by saying what he thought was the most exciting and surprising scientific discovery of his lifetime. Check out a snippet of the interview below and watch the full interview on Russia Today.
CHINA’S State Administration of Press, Publication, Radio, Film and Television (SAPPRFT) has issued a directive banning Lady Gaga in all forms of media, including television channels, radio stations, and music download websites, reported local media.
The order came about on Monday following the pop singer’s Sunday meeting with the Dalai Lama at the United States Conference of Mayors in Indianapolis, Indiana, where they discussed “the power of kindness and how to make the world a more compassionate place” during a Facebook Live chat and panel discussion.
Lady Gaga shared several photos of the meeting to her social media accounts, but for Beijing and the pop singer’s fans in China, all they saw was red.
On all her Instagram posts featuring the Dalai Lama, sentiments from Chinese fans ranged from disappointment to outright anger.
User silafuzhiyehe: “Cheated about Tibet, you don’t know the reality.”
User ghostyyep: “Not cool and meaningful at all. Gaga, I know you are trying to do things meaningful, but this is not just love and peace, it is part of our Chinese pride. Really disappointed.”
User yanweihan1991: “Maybe in your mind he is a fighter for freedom, while in Chinese people’s mind, Dalai is a person who is just like a terrorist.”
User wex_topsuger: “You don’t know what this picture can mean, but if you trust your Chinese fans, you should delete this.”
In light of the ban, the Publicity Department of China said:
“We need to fight against any propaganda fanning the flames of Tibet independence movement.”
The Chinese government frequently vilifies Tibet’s exiled spiritual leader, believing him to be at the heart of region’s separatist movement, even though he now says he espouses a “middle way” with China, seeking autonomy for Tibet, rather than independence.
Chinese officials also regularly issue warnings to celebrities and politicians seen meeting with the Dalai Lama, telling them to be aware of his “nefarious motives”.
Foreign Ministry spokesman Hong Lei said on Monday that the purpose of the Dalai Lama’s travels is to “promote his proposal for Tibetan independence”, adding that China would like people to be aware of “his true colors and nature”.
But for Lady Gaga, who has yet to hold a concert in mainland China, this isn’t the first time she’s faced censorship from the Chinese government. In 2011, after the release of her album Born This Way, she was placed on the country’s list of banned artists for “creating confusion in the order of the online music market, and damaging the nation’s cultural security”.
However, the ban – which was eventually lifted in 2014 – did not stop her fans from illegally downloading her albums online or buying pirated copies.
Very often travellers do not get the opportunity to engage that much with the locals or get any great understanding of the local culture and the daily life. This lack of real engagement between locals and foreigners has led to reports of locals seeing themselves as inferior to foreigners or as foreigners being seen as rich people who are like aliens from another country.
by Sanura Gunatilake
“In my experience, poor people are the world’s greatest entrepreneurs. Every day, they must innovate in order to survive. They remain poor because they do not have the opportunities to turn their creativity into sustainable income.” – Muhammed Yunus
( June 27, 2016, Colombo, Sri Lanka Guardian) Angkor Wat (Siem Reap), Cambodia is both a fascinating and sobering tale given its surge of tourism and subsequent challenges it is facing. As a Sri Lankan origin Australian, it is also an interest close to home as I have spent extended periods of time living and working in Cambodia.
For many, the visit to Siem Reap is over in 3 or less days, and will be an opportunity to take away a snapshot of Angkor Wat’s ethereal silhouette from the sun’s morning rays peaking behind it, or an adventure in the ruins admiring the intricacies of stone carvings done by ancient hands. Ranking number one on Lonely Planet’s 2015 best attractions of the world list, these awe-inspiring artefacts have given Cambodia it’s national identity as being aptly named ‘Kingdom of Wonder’. Wonder is also my reaction to finding out Siem Reap, for all its splendour, is also the third poorest province out of a total 23 provinces in the country.
From its beginnings of 7,600 tourists in 1993 when it was first added to UNESCO’s world heritage list to now having recorded 2.1 million visitors in the year of 2015, Siem Reap city is one of South East Asia’s most booming cities. Yet just not far away from the city centre, the overwhelming majority of 120,000 plus inhabitants within Angkor Park that is location to the 1,000 or more temples including the Angkor Wat – are living below the poverty line. Many are on incomes of average less than $30 USD a month, and almost 70% illiteracy according to data from 2007. [i]
[Angkor Wat splashed with early morning crimson sun rays]
Engagement with the locals
Very often travellers do not get the opportunity to engage that much with the locals or get any great understanding of the local culture and the daily life. This lack of real engagement between locals and foreigners has led to reports of locals seeing themselves as inferior to foreigners or as foreigners being seen as rich people who are like aliens from another country. More organised travel establishments have therefore been including community interactions as part of their experience.
If tourists were able to witness everyday life of Angkor Park residents, of which less than 10% are reported to be able to tap into tourism for income, they would question what is going wrong. The positive spillover of revenue from tourism are marginal compared to what is possible and the further away you get from inner city Siem Reap the benefits felt are practically zero, leaving behind a huge wealth gap.
Although Angkor Wat and surrounding temples are the star attraction, tourists undoubtedly spend the largest proportion on other things. Being a tourist you are spoilt for choice as you can find a variety of cuisines, a lively night life, endless massage parlours, marketplaces galore, traditional arts performance shows and a wide range of accommodation varying from very cheap but reasonable quality guesthouses to your lavish 5 star hotels and everything in between. A majority of city dwellers have carved out a livelihood based on the back of foreign investments in one way or another such as in hospitality, construction work from the ever-multiplying hotels, tuk tuk driving, NGO’s and more. Regardless of the sheer amount of foreign money, many are outspoken about the difficulties they have to face to benefit from tourist expenditure.
Ticket Sales
$60 million US dollars was reported to be generated in ticket sales to the Angkor Park just last year in 2015 and $20 million US dollars already just in the first three months of 2016. This is a significant monetary turnover in a country that you can buy a local meal for $3USD, $1USD for a local beer or even pay $25 USD for an exquisite 5 course fine dining experience.
The management of ticket sales has up until recently this year has been a joint share with a private company called Sokimex, that has dealings with oil operations, operating under its hospitality arm called Sokha Hotels and Resorts and APSARA Authority responsible for maintenance of temples. Under its management very little spillover of benefits have been felt by the locals of Angkor Park and allegations of under-reporting of visitors and revenue as well as cash unreported had been made.[ii] After Sokimex’s 17 yearlong contract, the government has finally taken over in its push to capitalise on this money inflow. Whether any difference will be made, one can only hope and see.
Who benefit?
The struggles were highlighted in a research conducted by Vannarith Chheang in 2007 which pointed out difficulties even for staff employed in hotels who were getting only about $100 USD a month being just enough to survive. [iii] Many hotels are owned by foreigners and rake up a large proportion of the profits. Common concerns by locals is of the popularity of organised tour groups from foreign countries such as Korea which hire their foreign-owned bus companies, eat at their foreign-owned restaurants, drink at their foreign owned places and thus most of the money goes back to their home country. It is a concern I have heard from tuk tuk drivers who are finding it more tough to work alongside the growth of these large organised tour arrangements.
Business growth is a fundamental component to Cambodia’s continued development. For the past decade and a half, majority of Cambodians who mostly live in rural areas have relied on the support of NGO projects to provide essential services and financial support. Cambodia is slowly however reaching a point where it cannot rely on foreign aid anymore as aid agencies are increasingly starting to shift money from Cambodia and redirect it to other countries such as Myanmar. Whilst aid has helped immensely, it has also helped engrain within the mindsets a dependency complex and it is a cycle that’s getting very hard to break out of. Thus Cambodia is trying to prop up its own entrepreneurial development base to create a culture of self-sustainability. As tourists we can help by supporting the pro-community establishments with our dollars. But there are significant impediments that hinder pro-community development, especially for the majority residing in rural areas even outside of Angkor Park.
Related Documentary:
Sellers of crafts and other souvenirs also have a lot to say about the products they sell. Only about half the products sold are reported to be made from local Cambodian producers, and the rest are imported from neighbouring countries such as Thailand, Vietnam and China. It is the middlemen who also take the most cut and leave little profits to the actual makers. Throughout much of rural Cambodia, there is no shortage of talented craftsman, artisans, artists and weavers who have skills that have been passed through from generations. However, they are at risk of possibly losing this knowledge as it is becoming harder to compete with imports and the youth are increasingly lacking motivation to pursue these old art forms when they can earn more steady incomes from garment factories.
The price tag of Cambodian products is much more expensive due to costing more to produce but is much better in quality, for example a $24 domestic handbag in comparison to a $7 imported one. This however makes it more difficult to sell as tourists haggle for the lowest price and usually settle for the best bargains without knowledge of what is local and what is not. However thankfully few organisations are helping keep these traditional skills alive by collectively buying from community artisans, creating cooperatives for producers to sell collectively, providing marketing, export channels, investment and revitalising designs to make it more fashionable for modern buyers and the international market. There still remains however a great deal of untapped skills that goes wasted as villagers lack access to profitable tourist markets and means of capital to operate effectively.
Poverty Contrast
Agriculture makes up a proportionately high amount of livelihoods in Cambodia with about 70 – 90% of people in rural areas of Siem Reap relying on it. The high turnover of raw food requirements for hotels, street vendors and restaurants make much of the Angkor Park farmers’ output a potential source of these raw ingredients. Unfortunately, most of the farmers are quite fragmented which makes it hard to supply in coordinated bulk amounts that are steadily available to businesses in Siem Reap.
In a research conducted in 2012, roughly $400 million USD of Cambodia’s $2 billion tourism income was flowing out of Cambodia for agricultural imports as even a lot of common domestically produced types of fruit sold by street vendors are imported from Thailand and Vietnam. [iv]The study found “local farmers (in Siem Reap) supply small quantities of food to this sector (hotels), but government officials and traders indicated that vegetables and meat consumed in hotels are mainly imported and hotels do not tend to promote Khmer dishes.” Livestock raised by locals were mostly on a subsistence level and thus not enough to supply to hotels, and the more than 20 varieties of herbs and vegetables cultivated are hardly in demand by hotels and restaurants catering to foreigners. Thus one of the most significant impediments is the ability to be able to supply the desired raw produce that are in demand to hotels and restaurants such as shrimp, lobsters and meats such as beef and specific vegetables that are consumed by tourists. The farmers simply don’t have these types of farms cultivating these items and lack the infrastructure to supply.
Additionally, inadequate communicative linkages between these farmers and hotels and restaurant chains make it hard for the local farmers to understand what is wanted and therefore not wanting to take the risk in borrowing from microfinance to get capital for expanding their agriculture, farmers end up selling to intermediaries at low costs. What is possible is for more initiatives to be created to encourage farmers to organise themselves to supply specific vegetables. This would then be needed to be implemented at a policy level to promote the linkages between these two sectors and essentially grow a niche where authentic Cambodian cuisine is promoted for tourists giving local farmers a competitive advantage. However, only a few tourist establishments and NGO’s have supported poor rural people with capacity building, small-community based projects and purchasing of local agriculture in addition to the promotion of responsible tourism.[v]Recently there has however been momentum as Cambodian Chefs Association have started creating meetings bringing together the chefs and the farmers from a rural commune in Siem Reap so that they can introduce chemical free locally grown produce and promote local development and are indicating that demand is exceeding supply available already. [vi]
NGO Role
A lot has been done by NGOs to promote responsible tourism related to child safe campaigns to curb underage sex work and campaigns to address the use of children as objects of tourists’ sightseeing made famous by Friends International’s thought-provoking “children are not tourist attractions” slogan. Friends International has had a strong presence in the country in enabling pro-community tourism for the past decade and half and have started up various successful social enterprises such as a restaurant chain called Friends that trains local underprivileged youth in service. Their popular child safe campaign was a reaction to the alarming trend occurring in Cambodia and that of “orphanage tourism” where many orphanages springing up were just exploitative businesses posing as orphanages to gain money or where parents were encouraged to give their children up for tourist dollars.
[From children are not tourist attractions: Friends International’s Childsafe picture makes tourists think twice about the way they interact with children]
My Impressions
One of the seven Child Safe tips mentioned are not to give to begging children as it promotes children into begging which can have detrimental effects on the future of Cambodian children. This one is extremely hard to do as it is heart-tugging to refuse a begging child and it is something you see often. I remember on one instance in a province called Kampong Cham I was shocked to see a little girl not more than 8 or 9 years old who was carrying a motionless baby asking tourists on the riverside for money only to find out later after we reported it that the actual mother was giving the baby a sleeping pill and sending the older daughter with the baby to attract sympathy dollars. Instances like these are not rare and as a responsible tourist the long-term effects of your actions must be considered.
Whilst I was in Cambodia I spent time working at an NGO and we had interviewed families about their family situation. On this one occasion, there was a mother with 2 very infant children who had extremely protruding bellies which was a significant indicator of malnutrition. On asked about this the mother putting on her bravest face said that she had just fed them milk and their bellies get like this after feeding. Whether she genuinely convinced herself that or not, I could not say. However, she had admitted to sending some of her older children to go begging by the riverside at night as that is often their income. This was one of the worst cases I saw and I sympathised with her deeply and couldn’t blame her at all – I couldn’t imagine what I’d do in such a situation. On principle I have never given to a child and have specifically only given to adults, but if considering to give something it would be better to give some food rather than give money.
Tourism has long been promoted as a vehicle for economic development and enabler out of poverty. Many locals of Siem Reap, especially the Angkor Park inhabitants have however been given little to prove them of this. Encouragingly, many more organisations in Siem Reap within the last few years are providing greater support and local development efforts are taking steps to integrate local community skills for pro-community sustainable tourism. However, these efforts are not possible without recognising the crucial link we as tourists play. By choosing to travel more responsibly, it does not have to limit our experience, but more so the opposite – it can make it more meaningful and enriching. Be different, interact, learn and feel inspired!
Sanura Gunatilake (BA Psychology, MA Social Research and Evaluation – NSW) is a social research and advocacy professional working in Australia and Southeast Asia. He can be contacted at:sanura@complexability.com.au
With the Sri Lankan government winding back commitments to reconciliation and justice measures, it’s up to the international community to hold them to account
‘Fresh evidence has emerged of the use of cluster bombs against Tamil civilians during the last phase of the war.’ Photograph: Tamilsagainstgenocide.org
In October 2015 the government of Sri Lanka co-sponsored, along with the US, a resolution on promoting reconciliation, accountability and human rights in Sri Lanka, which was adopted at the 30th session of the UN Human Rights Council. However, this very same government has since been backsliding from implementing its own commitments, promises and obligations made at the UNHRC.
In contradiction to the adopted resolution, which called for international involvement, including that of international judges to investigate wartime atrocities during the final stages of the war, Sri Lanka has instead insisted on setting up a domestic-only mechanism.
Sri Lanka’s prime minister, Ranil Wickremesinghe, has explicitly ruled outpossibilities for international judges’ involvement and emphasised that any probe will be purely domestic. Its president, Maithripala Sirisena, too has said, “I will not agree to get foreign judges in to any kind of investigations into human rights violations allegations.”
The 32nd session of the UNHRC began on 13 June 2016. In the days leading up to it, the Sri Lankan government hurriedly took steps to be seen as dealing with the resolution.
Ahead of the session, Sri Lanka’s cabinet approved the establishment of an Office of Missing Persons (OMP), which critics say was done in order to manage international scrutiny at the UNHRC. Human Rights Watch had said that in the same week the government ratified the Convention against Enforced Disappearance, it created an OMP without promised consultations with families of the “disappeared”. Just a year ago, the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights had urged for a victim-centric approach when dealing with the past, and for a transitional justice process.
For Tamil war victims and survivors, the statements by the Sri Lankan president and prime minister are indeed disheartening. Apart from a few symbolic returns of occupied Tamil lands and the release of some political prisoners, unsurprisingly, there have been no constructive actions to address wartime accountability or end the culture of impunity.
The government has also failed to demilitarise Tamil areas. Instead, notorious “white van” abductions, torture, arbitrary arrests and unlawful detentions under the draconian Prevention of Terrorism Act have continued till as recent as May this year. Constant military surveillance in the north and east of the island has prolonged the sense of fear and insecurity among the Tamil people.
When the regime changed in January 2015, a section of external actors believed the change to be an opportunity for major reforms, restoration of democracy and reconciliation. Arguably, this new agenda sidelined the principal pathway to genuine reconciliation such as accountability and justice, and as a consequence the release of a most anticipated Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) Investigation on Sri Lanka report was deferred from March to September 2015.
This delayed report detailed severe allegations against the Sri Lankan government and its armed forces.
The earlier panel of experts report and the UN secretary general’s internal review panel also contained allegations against the Sri Lankan government and its armed forces. In addition to these international reports, three resolutions were adopted and passed at the UNHRC respectively in March 2012, March 2013 and March 2014. These resolutions did not downplay the allegations of mass atrocities committed by the Sri Lankan government.
Nevertheless, following all these reports and resolutions which detailed numerous abuses and violations of international law by both warring parties, including the Sri Lankan government, surprisingly Sri Lanka co-sponsored the October 2015 resolution.
Prior to this last resolution, the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights had recommended the establishment of a hybrid special court to try war crimes and crimes against humanity allegedly committed by all parties to the armed conflict. He had also found “Sri Lanka’s domestic legal framework to be inadequate to deal with international crimes of this magnitude”. In addition, he said that the “State’s security sector and justice system had been distorted and corrupted by decades of impunity”.
It has been a long time since the majority of Tamil war victims and survivors held faith in any Sri Lankan domestic mechanism. This has compelled them to create new spaces outside of Sri Lanka to seek justice.
Amid threats to their lives, many have taken great risks to engage with the UNHRC in the hope that theinternational system, particularly the UNHRC, would be a key platform to deliver justice.
However, with political developments since last year, their trust and expectations of the UNHRC have been proven to be in vain. Apart from visits and statements by UN representatives, little tangible action or leverage has been placed on Sri Lanka to pressure it into upholding its own promises.
On 13 June, at the opening of the current session, the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights said, “In Sri Lanka, the government’s efforts to implement its commitments in Resolution 30/1 will require a comprehensive strategy on transitional justice that enables it to pursue different processes in a coordinated, integrated and appropriately sequenced manner.” On 29 June, he is expected to present an oral update on the resolution.
Critics have noted that Sri Lanka has held the belief that prolonging this issue, through engaging in a process of time and space buying, will eventually lead to the eradication of the justice and accountability issue from the international agenda.
On the eve of the current session, Sri Lanka’s president said in an interview that “nations which had distanced themselves and the UN are now friendly with us. The loud cries of war crimes allegations have receded. The loud cries for setting up War Crimes Tribunal to probe the allegation have ceased too.” His comments serve as a clear indication of the absence of political will by the Sri Lankan government.
A mere week after the president’s comments and amid the ongoing UNHRC session, fresh evidence has emerged of the use of cluster bombs against Tamil civilians during the last phase of the war, including in areas declared by the government as “no fire zones”. Reports by the Guardian have identified the Sri Lankan Air Force as being responsible for these attacks.
This further underscores the imperative need for the international community, including the UN, to urgently move out of its current state of stagnation. It is vital that the international community not only focuses on the UNHRC to ensure it efficiently and effectively addresses the legitimate concerns of Tamil war victims and survivors, but also explores other avenues beyond the UNHRC in order to avoid the elimination of this very grave issue from the international agenda, and to deliver justice and achieve accountability.
(10 leading civil society persons speak to SLB on Human Rights in Sri Lanka)
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
26/06/2016
The implementation of pledges made by the new Government to the people of Sri Lanka and to the international community on human rights and reconciliation has not yet proceeded as expected. Early enthusiasm on achieving much needed democratic reforms and a corruption-free governance has started to recede. The Government has not sufficiently implemented issues like demilitarisation, resettlement, release of political prisoners, and has not repealed the PTA. The most needed security sector reforms are left untouched.
At the same time, people have been able to assert their civil and political rights through the democratic space that opened up through the regime change in 2015, even if the transitional justice process still remains a serious concern. In addition, the enjoyment of economic, social and cultural rights need an economic space which has not yet been opened up.
These developments have to be located within the wider political context. The current so-called ‘good governance’ Government is a coalition of two major political parties which fought each other to capture state power for more than five decades. Mistrust and antagonistic feeling of each other are therefore embedded in both parties. Indeed, this coalition is a marriage of necessity rather than of conviction. Yet, one of the factors that hold both parties together is the commitment shown by President Sirisena, the leader of the SLFP, and by Prime Minister Wickremasinghe, the leader of the UNP, towards democratic reforms. This also includes the drive to find a political solution to the ethnic issue.
In this context, two other actors have played a pivotal positive role: On the one hand, civil society has been effective to hold the two political leaders accountable in regards to the promises they made and the mechanisms they have established to ensure good governance and the implementation of human rights. On the other hand, the international community have expressed economic and political support to the Government and pushed the reform process forward.
In contrast to this, former President Rajapaksa mobilises against the Government and his efforts to weaken the Government by fostering Sinhala nationalist extremism is a major risk factor in the country. He has not allowed current President Sirisena to take the reins of SLFP and has created his own faction of the party, campaigning and mobilising against any criminal justice procedures undertaken against members of the military. Seemingly, Rajapaksa aims to play the military against the new Government and its reform process.
A second destabilising factor, that has not been sufficiently considered yet, is the possibility of an economic recession. Currently, the country is facing a debt trap. Sri Lanka’s foreign debt increased during Rajapaksa’s second term from US$ 18.6 billion in 2009 to US$ 44.8 billion in 2015. Sri Lanka’s debt servicing costs, i.e. capital repayments and interest costs, amounted to US$ 4.68 billion in 2015 which constitutes 45% of the country’s export earnings of the same year. These economic considerations clearly call for economic reforms which seem to be the weakest link of the current Government and need to be addressed urgently.
As a whole, the reform process has gained an important momentum recently, probably in view of the upcoming 32nd session of the Human Rights Council in June 2016. The Government has improved its relations with the UNHRC and has opened up the country for human rights scrutiny by UN agencies.
Despite the different weaknesses in the reform process, this current political momentum remains the best opportunity for Sri Lanka to move its reforms forward, to ensure democratic governance and to assert the rights for its people.
An advanced version of the High Commissioner for Human Right’s oral update released on Monday, called on Sri Lanka's government to take concrete “steps to address impatience, anxiety and reservations towards the process,” noting that “international participation in the accountability mechanisms would be a necessary guarantee for the independence and impartiality of the process.”
The High Commissioner Zeid Al Hussein went on to stress in his conclusion that “continuing allegations of arbitrary arrest, torture and sexual violence, as well as more general military surveillance and harassment, must be swiftly addressed, and the structures and institutional culture that promoted those practices be dismantled, to show there will be no tolerance for practices of the past.”
Noting Sri Lanka's constitutional reform process, Mr Hussein stressed that he hopes, "the political process of adopting constitutional changes will not involve trade-offs and compromises on core issues of accountability, transitional justice and human rights."
The high commissioner highlighted further concerns regarding a rise of "aggressive campaigns in social media and other forms that stoke nationalism against ethnic, religious and other minorities."
The oral update stressed that ongoing “encouragement and support of the Human Rights Council has been crucial in giving assurance and confidence to all stakeholders, particularly the victim community.”
Noting new evidence of the usage of cluster munition towards the end of the conflict, the high commissioner called for “an independent and impartial investigation to be carried out.”
Expressing concern that “Sri Lanka’s judicial institutions currently lack the credibility needed to gain the trust” of the victim community, the Human Rights Chief stressed that he “remained convinced that international participation in the accountability mechanisms would be a necessary guarantee for the independence and impartiality of the process in the eyes of victims.”
The high commissioner further stressed the “magnitude” and complexities of the “international crimes” to be investigated, stating,
“It is also important to keep in mind the OHCHR investigation found could amount to war crimes, crimes against humanity.”
Highlighting a “deeper challenge” of ongoing concerns of militarisation he said that “the military presence in the north and east remains heavy and a culture of surveillance and, in certain instances intimidation and harassment persists.”
Noting Sri Lanka’s continued reliance on the Prevention for Terrorism Act (PTA) and increased protests amongst the Tamil North-East the High Commissioner said,
“The fate of remaining security detainees held under the PTA remains a major concern for the Tamil community.”
The high commissioner expressed further concern that ongoing arrests in an “arbitrary manner and without following proper legal procedure,” continued to “strike fear in the community and undermine confidence in the government’s efforts.”
Referring to the findings of the Special Rapporteur on Torture's visit to Sri Lanka, the High Commissioner, noted "recurring allegations of torture and ill-treatment of security detainees," adding that there were "reported cases of torture and sexual abuse of Tamils returning to Sri Lanka."
Highlighting the slow pace of returning lands occupied by the military to civilians in the North and East, the high commissioner added that “the government has also not moved fast enough with other tangible measures that would help build confidence among victims and minority communities.”
The high commissioner found ongoing “reports of military engagement in commercial activities, including farming and tourism,” further adding that “new levels of frustration and disenchantment,” were arising amongst the victim community.”
Stressing the importance of consulting victims abroad, the update added, "the High Commissioner emphasizes the need to include the voices abroad and encourages further outreach in the diaspora."
The high commissioner's update drew upon existing calls for Sri Lanka to criminalise enforced disappearances as per the government's duty under the Disappearances Convention (CED), which it ratified earlier this year.
Mr Hussein further stressed the need to subject Sri Lanka's armed forces to a vetting process before they participated calling for "stringent screening procedures, at both national and international level, for all personnel Sri Lanka needs to deploy."
The Tamil National Alliance (TNA) has claimed to have reached a tripartite consensus in respect of foreign judges, defence attorneys, investigators etc., in a Sri Lankan judicial mechanism to probe war crimes before the Geneva-based United Nations Human Rights Council (UNHRC) unanimously adopted a resolution to pave the way for inquiry.
On behalf of the TNA, its spokesperson and Jaffna District parliamentarian M.A. Sumanthiran has told a recent ‘Congressional Caucus for Ethnic and Religious Freedom in Sri Lanka’ in Washington that the government of Sri Lanka, the TNA and the US had been involved in the negotiations leading to the agreement.
The declaration was made in the presence of Sri Lanka’s Ambassador in Washington Prasad Kariyawasam.
The event was moderated by Sadhanand Dhume of the American Enterprise Institute, a Washington-based think tank. The Caucus is an initiative launched by United States House Representatives Bill Johnson of Ohio and Danny Davis of Illinois, in November, 2013.
Attorney-at-law Sumanthiran stressed that the resolution was moved in Geneva following an understanding that the participation of foreigners wouldn’t be contrary to Sri Lanka’s Constitution. Declaring that he had been personally involved in the negotiations, with the United States of America also participating in that particular process, Sumanthiran said: "There were some doubts created, as to whether the Constitution of Sri Lanka would allow for foreign nationals to function as judges and we went into that question, clarified it, and said yes they can".
Sumanthiran told the Congressional Caucus that the resolution accepted at Geneva had been negotiated and they settled for a hybrid model though they originally asked for an international inquiry.
The Global Tamil Forum (GTF) spokesperson Suren Surendiran told The Island that agreement on the text of the resolution had been reached following negotiations among what he called Core Group of members at the UNHRC, the government of Sri Lanka and representatives of Tamils. The agreement on a Sri Lankan judicial mechanism, including the special counsel’s office, of Commonwealth and other foreign judges, defence lawyers and authorized prosecutors and investigators was certainly not negotiable, Surendiran said.
In his lengthy presentation to the Congressional caucus on June 14, MP Sumanthiran discussed a range of issues, including the role of the US and India in resolution of the national issue.
Both MP Sumanthiran and Surendiran emphasised that they expected the full implementation of the UNHRC resolution.
In his brief remarks, Ambassador Kariyawasam provided an overview of the measures taken by Sri Lanka to promote its two-pronged policy of reconciliation and development since the January 2015 election of the current government and reiterated in detail, measures taken by the government to vindicate its commitment to these processes and explained the several challenges that militate against government efforts.
Jaffna District Tamil National Alliance Parliamentarian and the Leader of People's Liberation Organization of Tamil Eelam, Dharmalingam Sithadthan commenting on the land issues in the Northern Province told Ceylon Today, "We have a feeling that the Army is reluctant to release the lands and the Government doesn't want to control the Army at this stage. However this cannot go on forever. It has to be solved,"
Following are excerpts of the interview:
? Why did the TNA form an eight member team in the current scenario? What are the priorities of this team in negotiating with the Government on current issues?
A:This team will not just negotiate with the Government, the main aim of this team is to discuss the policy within the TNA in relevance to the current issue and then shall proceed further.We shall meet with the Government representatives especially with the President and the Prime Minister to discuss current issues relating to the Constitution and day to day matters in the North and East, especially on missing persons, release of political prisoners, land matters and other issues.Until now there was no such official meeting between the TNA and the leadership of the Government. Therefore, we as the TNA must discuss and identify the problems especially on the issues regarding the Constitution and the day to day matters. We feel that lots of things are yet to be completed. The promises are being honoured very slowly. Thus we decided that we must hold a meeting with Government representatives. We feel even within the TNA there is no proper discussion as such. The executive committee of the TNA is only meeting once in a while. Matters are being planned by Leader Sampanthan and Sumanthiran, and sometimes we are not informed, that is also a reason. All will be equal in this committee; however, as usual Sampanthan will be our leader. There is no question about it. However we want everyone in this team to contribute and decide together.
? As you know Public Representations Committee on Constitutional Reforms in their report stated that most of those from the North and East had demanded for a federal solution. But others from the rest of the country are not in a position to accept it. Why do you think they are against it?
A: Tamils in the North and East are urging to go for a federal set up. However people in the South, mainly the Sinhalese, they think federal is separation. They are unaware of the real meaning of federalism. I think it is the duty of the Government and even the Tamil parties to explain it to the Sinhala community and tell them the actual meaning of federalism. In 1994 when the former President Chandrika Bandaranaike tried to bring a solution, people like Minister Mangala Samaraweera , Dilan Perera and Dallas Alahapperuma formed the Sudu Neluma Movement and went around educating the people of the need for a political solution. A meaningful solution as far as we are concerned can only be a federal solution, because a unitary system cannot give a meaningful solution. The Government can control and interfere in matters that should be dealt at provincial level. Thus we are demanding for a federal solution. I also feel some of these politicians are getting hold of federalism as their own political tool by just blaming the Sinhala people.
? You being one of the constituent parities of the TNA, what is your observation on the 32nd Geneva UNHCR Sessions?
A: The Government by co-sponsoring the resolution they themselves committed to certain things. They agreed to repeal the Prevention of Terrorism Act, releasing the political prisoners and many other issues, over all these they agreed for a political solution. The progress on those promises is very minimal. Therefore, the UNHCR Commissioner must certainly inform the Government that these things must improve. The Government must go forward towards the implementation of the resolution.
? The Government released lands in the Northern Province as they promised. But currently, certain lands are released, yet people are unable to enter the lands. This situation prevails especially in Valikamam North High Security Zone. How do you view this situation?
A: I have also seen that in certain areas lands are not released. People are not allowed to enter, even if they are owners. This problem continues to prevail; this makes us feel that there is a contradiction between the Government and the Army, who have actually occupied those areas. It cannot happen anymore. Therefore they can ease this situation and I believe it is the duty of the Government and not the Army. The Government must examine whether the lands are released properly. The President himself, in Jaffna, had promised the TNA many times the lands can be released.
I really don't understand why the military doesn't want to release the lands even in Mullaitivu and Kilinochchi. Also there are no military camps in these lands as such. My personal view is, maybe they are trying their best to keep those lands for future colonization to deny the right of the Tamil people to stay in those areas. Vast acres of lands are still occupied as High Security Zones. Still the Army decides for the Government. I don't understand this situation. Lands must be certainly released to the people. There are lands which are either permit lands or deed lands; which the owners of the lands must be able to access.
? How far do you think the Government had succeeded in addressing the humanitarian issues in the North and East?
A: Very little progress. There is peace among people after this Government came into power. There was a fear psychosis during the previous regime; however it does not exist anymore. Previously we were able to identify intelligence officers in the North and there was a fear psychosis among people. Now it does not happen and it is a relief for the people.
We must say that the Government is looking in the right direction. Even though they have achieved little, at least they are looking at the right direction. Although their progress is slow and people are unhappy, there is something being carried out by them. Therefore the Government must expedite their promises as early as possible, as the people are losing patience and they tend to believe that this Government is also not doing anything. Even today (yesterday) the people of Valikamam North are marching to their own lands demanding their release. I don't understand the scenario, is the Army blocking the Government or is it the other way around. We have a feeling that the Army is reluctant to release the lands and the Government doesn't want to control the Army at this stage. However this cannot go on forever. It has to be solved.
? Recently the Northern Provincial Council had passed a resolution to withdraw the preschool conducted by the Army, especially in the Mullaitivu and Kilinochchi Districts. How do you view?
A: Do you know these teachers in such preschools are paid well? Some people are employed we must agree. I personally don't want to see people unemployed. Yet I shall point out that this practice is quite bad. The Army cannot run preschools, it is a civilian matter, in principle it is wrong. Army cannot run preschools, it has to be a civilian matter and disciplined. The preschools must be run by the provincial council. This is why the resolution was passed at the provincial council, and such preschools must be stopped. We are unsure as to what is being taught in those preschools.
? You have been continuously emphasizing on the economic centre in the North, and that Prime Minister and President must interfere to solve the matter. What exactly is the situation?
A: It was proposed to be built in Vavuniya. Yet there were many conflicts regarding the venue. Especially Minister Rishad Bathiudeen wants to build the economic centre in town on Kandy Road next to the Vavuniya Hospital. They even proposed to have it in the Vavuniya Municipal area and it cannot be maintained, as there is only five acres of land. When we start something new we must consider the future development. If we build the economic centre out of the town area it easy to occupy 20-30 acres for the centre and make use of the land for future developments as well. When we build an economic centre we must consider parking facilities and waste disposal mechanisms. Many aspects have to be considered. They want to dismantle the agriculture centre in Thandikulam where there are valuable plants, which are more than 15 years of age. This is a place where agrarian development research, for the entire province, is done.
However the Northern Province Chief Minister had selected five areas, and suggested to build the Northern Economic Centre in one of those places.
Currently I'm able to view that there are interested parties on both sides, in the TNA as well as the Government, they are trying to disturb this attempt. Also the Government representatives try to take the Northern Economic Centre towards the town area. Minister of Rural Economic Affairs P. Harrison suggests building it in Medawachchiya. Therefore the interested parties are trying to make it a big issue. They are simply trying to take it out of the North.
? For a long time there had been demand to repeal the Prevention of Terrorism Act (PTA), but there seems to be no progress on amending it. What do you think can be done?
A: This is why we are unhappy on the Government's progress on the humanitarian issues. It is known to everyone that it is mentioned in the UN report itself as a recommendation to repeal the PTA and the Government is committed to it. By co-sponsoring to the resolution, they have committed to it. Yet the progress is very slow. We understand recently there was a draft and was not happy with it, and then they were on the process of drafting another amendment. I don't think they really want to repeal it but just bring it in another form.
The Tamil Civil Society Forum today warned the international community that the ‘unwarranted praise and promotion’ of the Sri Lankan Government from certain powerful sections of the International Community, can result in the Government withdrawing from its obligations under the UNHCR resolution.
TCSF Convener – Bishop of Mannar, Dr. Rayappu Joseph
In a statement issued today, the Tamil Civil Society also claimed that the Sri Lankan Government believes that if it successfully handles and appeases the interests of different sections of the International Community, it can escape from the obligations laid out in the UNHRC resolution.
“We hope that the High Commissioner will unequivocally identify the fundamental transgressions in the approach of the Government to the resolution thus far and further appropriately advice member-states of actions that may be required to ensure that the recommendations of the OISL report are given effect to,” the statement said.
We publish below the statement in full;
Statement on the Government of Sri Lanka’s adherence to its obligations under the Geneva Resolution
In September 2015 the UN Human Rights Council passed a resolution on Sri Lanka, laying out the foundations for a process for accountability and justice in Sri Lanka, with the intention of giving effect to the recommendations of the OISL Report. The resolution mandated the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights to continue to assess progress on the implementation of its recommendations and other relevant processes related to reconciliation, accountability and human rights and present an oral report at the 32nd session of the council. The report is scheduled to be presented on the 29th of June 2016. We wish to bring the following to the attention to the High Commissioner in this regard:
1. The Government of Sri Lanka ever since the resolution was passed, has put forward a narrative that the resolution was not imposed upon them by external actors but rather was voluntarily accepted and self-given. The paragraph of most significance in the resolution is operative paragraph 6 which emphasised the importance of participation in a judicial mechanism, including the special counsel’s office, of Commonwealth and other foreign judges, defence lawyers and authorized prosecutors and investigators. In a statement released jointly by more than 40 Tamil organisations at that time, we emphasised that the Tamil people’s unequivocal stance was that only an international judicial investigation would provide a fair chance for truth and justice but that we were willing to give a hybrid court a chance if such a court’s design and control was not left entirely to the hands of the Sri Lankan Government. We emphasised that we were willing to explore the possibility of supporting a court made up of a majority of UN appointed judges and prosecutors.
Despite describing the obligations under the resolution as voluntarily given, from the very beginning, the President of Sri Lanka chose to take the stance that the requirements of paragraph 6 will not be adhered to. The President has been categorical that foreign judges would not be included in the proposed judicial mechanism. When the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights visited the island, the High Commissioner’s press release at the end of his visit noted that both had assured their firm conviction with regard to the commitments that they had made. But even after the visit the President continued to claim that foreign judges will not feature in a judicial mechanism. More recently the Prime Minister has also publicly taken the position that there will be no foreign judges. We construe this stance of the Government as amounting to a fundamental breach of an important obligation in the UNHRC resolution. The breach is so fundamental that it throws into doubt the sincerity of the Government as to its commitment to implementing the obligations under the resolution as a whole.
2. The UNHRC resolution emphasises in paragraph 3 of the need to consult the victim communities in the design of the transitional justice mechanisms. A Consultation Taskforce was set up earlier this year but the consultation process is still in the process of being designed. It is in this context that a draft legislation has been tabled in parliament on the 22nd of June by the Government on the setting up of an Office for Missing Persons. No proper consultations have been held on this important piece of legislation with the families of the disappeared. The families were circulated a two page leaflet that was short on detail with regard to many important issues, and a meeting was hurriedly put together by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs on short notice. Many organisations including TCSF have raised substantial concerns with regard to the proposals but the Government nevertheless has decided to present the bill to Parliament, indicating that the timing was purely designed to attract the attention of the High Commissioner in the lead up to his oral report. The attitude of the Government is indicative of the callous disregard for the need for a genuine consultative process. Given that the Prime Minister had declared earlier this year in Jaffna, that all those reported to have been disappeared must be dead, the whole initiative lacks bona fides.
3. There is no satisfactory progress on issues relating to re-creating normal conditions in the North and East of Sri Lanka either. While there has been some release of land in certain areas on the other hand the Government is continuing with the acquisition of land elsewhere in the North and East for the security forces. There is indicative of the lack of a coherent policy with regard to land release on the part of the Government. Illegal occupation of state land by the armed forces in particular continues without change. Even where land has been released there has been no de-militarisation. This is true of both Valikamam North in Jaffna and Sampur in Trincomalee. The release of political prisoners has been put on the back burner. Many prisoners continue to linger in prison without charge. The commitment to repeal of the Prevention of Terrorism Act still remains only in word and reports suggest that the legislation being drafted to replace the PTA may be similar or worse to the PTA in substance. The PTA continues to be actively used and arrests are particularly targeted at ex-LTTE cadres. The use of the PTA to terrorise ex-LTTE cadres continues to hamper their reintegration with society. White van abductions continue as documented by credible organisations.
![[Angkor Wat splashed with early morning crimson sun rays]](http://www.slguardian.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/06/Angkor-Wat_sunset1.jpg)
![[From children are not tourist attractions: Friends International’s Childsafe picture makes tourists think twice about the way they interact with children]](http://www.slguardian.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/06/kids_cambodia.jpg)
