Protesters display placards during a rally outside of the Chinese Consulate ahead of today's ruling. Pic: AP.
A Chinese vessel, top center, is used to expand structures and land on the Johnson Reef, called Mabini by the Philippines and Chigua by China, at the Spratly Islands in the South China Sea. Pic: AP.
CHINA breached the Philippine’s sovereign rights by exploring resources in the South China Sea, the Permanent Court of Arbitration in The Hague ruled today.
The tribunal issued its ruling Tuesday in The Hague in response to an arbitration case brought by the Philippines against China.
The panel said that any historic rights to resources that China may have had were wiped out if they are incompatible with exclusive economic zones established under a U.N. treaty.
The tribunal blamed China for causing permanent, irreparable harm to Spratlys’ coral reef eco-system.
The Philippine government welcomed the ruling, with Philippine Foreign Secretary Perfecto Yasay saying in Manila the “milestone decision” was an important contribution to efforts in addressing disputes in the sea.
He said: “The Philippines reiterates its abiding commitment to efforts of pursuing the peaceful resolution and management of disputes with the view of promoting and enhancing peace and stability in the region.”
The Chinese government swiftly rejected an international tribunal’s ruling that China’s claim of much of the South China Sea has no legal basis, saying Beijing does not accept the jurisdiction of the panel.
In a statement, the foreign ministry said that China “solemnly declares that the award is null and void and has no binding force. China neither accepts nor recognizes it.”
In an official statement on its territorial sovereignty over South China Sea, the Chinese government said: “The activities of the Chinese people in the South China Sea date back to over 2,000 years ago. China is the first to have discovered, named, and explored and exploited Nanhai Zhudao and relevant waters, and the first to have exercised sovereignty and jurisdiction over them continuously, peacefully and effectively, thus establishing territorial sovereignty and relevant rights and interests in the South China Sea.”
It also claimed that more than 60 countries and international organizations, as well as over 130 foreign political parties and groups, have voiced support for its “principled position”, far outnumbering those backing the assertions of the Aquino administration and the United States, which is widely considered as a primary instigator behind the arbitration case.
Rival demonstrators held a shouting match outside the seat of the Permanent Court of Arbitration in The Hague as it delivered its ruling.
Three demonstrators were seenholding up banners shouted “China out of Philippine waters!” while rival protesters yelled in Chinese.
Earlier more than 100 left-wing activists marched to the Chinese consulate in metropolitan Manila yelling, “Philippine territory is ours, China get out.” They called their campaign to push China out of the South China Sea, “CHexit” or “China exit now.”
Protest leader Renato Reyes of the Bayan group called on China to respect the tribunal’s decision, which he said would likely favor the Philippines.
Chinese coast guard ships, he said, have blocked Filipino fishermen from disputed areas like the Scarborough Shoal, affecting their livelihood.
Fisherman Fernando Rayman, who joined the protest, hoped the ruling will favor the Philippines and stop China’s aggressive actions “so that our family can have a better life, we can send our children to school, because now it’s very hard.”
Southeast Asian neighbor Thailand has urged all parties with stakes in the South China Sea to maintain peace and stability.
In a statement issued ahead of the ruling, Thailand’s foreign ministry said it is important to restore trust and confidence among countries in the region.
It said the situation in the South China Sea should be resolved “on the basis of mutual trust and confidence as well as equitable benefit” that would reflect the long-standing relations between China and the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN).
Vietnam, however, accused Chinese vessels of sinking a Vietnamese fishing boat in disputed waters ahead of the ruling.
Nguyen Thanh Hung, a local fisheries executive in central province of Quang Ngai said two Chinese vessels chased and sank the Vietnamese fishing boat as it was fishing near the Paracel Islands on Saturday. The fishermen were rescued by a fellow fishing trawler some seven hours later.
As well as China and the Philippines, Malaysia and Vietnam have claims on the disputed waters.
The lead counsel for the Philippines in a high-profile case challenging China’s sweeping claims in the disputed South China Sea says the response of other coastal states will be crucial in the aftermath of the ruling.
The Philippines is challenging the validity of the so-called nine-dash line that China uses to demarcate its claims to most of the South China Sea, where tensions have been mounting. China is boycotting the case.
The incidents in Bangladesh do not belong to that particular type of terrorism; they are simply a reaction against Hasina Wajid’s unjust and partial approach towards the religious segments of society.
by Ali Sukhanver
( July 11, 2016, Islamabad, Sri Lanka Guardian) ‘The violence has shaken the whole country, as it appears to be the first attempt at a major attack directed entirely at Muslims,’ says CNN in a report on recent disturbance in Bangladesh. But fact of the matter is that whatever happened there in Bangladesh during the last few weeks is neither unpredicted nor unexpected; more than 23 innocent people were brutally pushed to the realm of death in Holey Artisan Bakery café incident and 3 people at a checkpoint when gunmen carrying bombs tried to attack the country’s biggest gathering for the Eid prayers. Some of the analysts are alleging the Muslim militant organizations for these incidents but it seems quite illogical to fix and frame Daesh and Al-Qaeda in every act of terrorism. The incidents in Bangladesh do not belong to that particular type of terrorism; they are simply a reaction against Hasina Wajid’s unjust and partial approach towards the religious segments of society.
According to the media reports on Holey Artisan Bakery café incident, nine of the victims were Italian, seven were Japanese, one was from India, two were Bangladeshi and one was a U.S. citizen of Bangladeshi origin. Out of twenty, eleven of the victims were male and nine were female. Just after the Café Attack, different news channels were of the opinion that this ‘terrorist’ activity was a joint venture of Daesh and ISIS and as per routine some Indian news channels tried to ‘expose’ the involvement of Pakistan’s premier spy agency ISI in the matter but Dhaka’s Inspector General of Police Shahid-ul-Hoque simply rejected all these possibilities by telling the media that all the attackers in the deadly assault on Dhaka’s Holey Artisan Bakery café were Bangladeshi citizens and five of them were militants that police had tried to arrest previously.
At the same time when we look at the ability of the security forces of Bangladesh regarding countering terrorism, we find them successfully eligible. According to the details of the firing episode in Sholakia, a place 100 Kms in northeast of the capital Dhaka, more than 300,000 people were taking part in mass prayers when the attack was launched. The attackers’ target was the congregation but the police very bravely stopped them from crossing the checkpoint which was set up about a kilometer from the gathering place. One of the attackers was killed and four others were taken into custody.
For the last many years, Bangladesh has been facing a very painful situation of conflict and confrontation between Hasina Wajid and the Islam-loving population of Bangladesh. Hasina is devotedly striving to introduce Bangladesh as a secular state to the world around whereas the religious forces there are not willing to give in before her illogical desire. This situation has given birth to various self-styled Islamic State groups or so-called offshoots of the al-Qaida network. Bangladesh has been reeling from a growing wave of attacks since the turn of the year, many of which have been claimed by the self-styled Islamic State group or an offshoot of the al-Qaida network however Sheikh Hasina’s has been consistently denying presence of any such groups but the present wave of violence does not support her denial. It is also a fact that inwardly Hasina would be happy over the situation because as a result of this present wave of violence she would get more opportunities of crushing the religious elements in the name of investigation. And above all she would get more chances of pleasing Mr. Modi and other Hindu extremists across the border. In short things are going to get worse for the religious people of Bangladesh and better for Modi-loving Sheikh Hasina.
The religious people of Bangladesh must be prepared for more hangings in the name of ‘action against violence’. A lady who is so revengeful on those who opposed the partition of Pakistan on religious basis 45 years back would be harder on those who are protesting against secular trends in present day Bangladesh. In short Bangladesh is going to be converted into a bloody battle field very soon; moreover the Modi government shall take full benefit of the situation. The agents of R&AW shall become more active and shall add fuel to fire with their conspiracies.
We must not forget the reality that India has a very old desire of wiping off the identity of Bangladesh by merging it in India. In December 2015, a report was published in various Indian and Bangladeshi websites with the title, ‘India has a long term plan to annex Bangladesh in a way or other in future’. The report said, ‘India does have plans to annex different regions of Bangladesh in the near future and is augmenting its armed forces and paramilitary forces in the Bengal, Assam and Tripura to do just this. India is gathering strength in all such region so that one million Indian troops will soon be positioned to attack six points along the India-Bangladesh border to capture the desired parts of the Bangladesh territory including the Rangpur region, the Khulna region, the Sylhet region, the entire Chittagong region.’ Different pro-India Bangladeshi scholars have been raising a question since long; why can’t Bangladesh peacefully join India? They say that by doing so the economic problems of Bangladesh would get solved and also India will benefit a lot from the fertile lands of Bangladesh. So the game is on; Hasina is doing all her best to fulfill India’s dreams but at the same time the religious people of Bangladesh are determined that they would never let Modi become their new-father. Let us see what happens next.
Prime Minister Narendra Modi addresses a news conference during his official welcoming ceremony at the State House in Nairobi, Kenya, July 11, 2016.REUTERS/THOMAS MUKOYA
Tue Jul 12, 2016
Two central government ministers resigned on Tuesday, a week after Prime Minister Narendra Modi expanded his powerful inner circle to improve the efficiency of his administration.
President Pranab Mukherjee, on Modi's advice, has accepted the resignations of Najma A. Heptulla, the minister of minority affairs, and G.M. Siddeshwara, the junior minister of heavy industries, the government said in a statement.
Mukhtar Abbas Naqvi, a junior minister in the minority affairs ministry, has been given independent charge of the ministry, while Babul Supriyo, a singer-turned-politician, would take up the junior minister's portfolio in the heavy industries ministry, the statement added.
The government did not give a reason for the decision.
Modi inducted 19 new ministers into his cabinet last Tuesday to bolster his two-year-old administration but drew criticism that he was backtracking on a promise of lean government.
(Reporting by Sankalp Phartiyal; Editing by Gareth Jones)
A Muslim woman working at an Austrian company had a simple request: She already wrote a headscarf and abaya — a garment that covered the rest of her body — but she wanted to begin wearing a full face veil too.
Her boss refused to let it happen, allegedly telling her that she couldn’t take her “experiment in ethnic clothing” into the workplace.
On Tuesday, Austria’s supreme court ruled that her boss was right, claimingin its decision that leaving one’s face uncovered is one of the “undisputed basic rules of communication” in Austria.
Both the woman and her employer remained anonymous, and the court agreed that she was probably discriminated against due to the language her boss used, even if he was constitutionally correct in refusing to allow her to wear the veil at work. For that reason, the court awarded her around $1,320 — a fraction of the some $9,300 she argued that she deserved.
Austria’s far-right, anti-immigrant party lost the recent presidential elections by a narrow margin, and just won the opportunity for a second, snap election in August. Their platform was based largely on a narrative that refugees — many of whom are Muslim — threaten Austria’s social fabric.
Tuesday’s ruling is the latest in a series of decisions in Europe that prevent Muslims from practicing certain aspects of their faith if they’re believed to interrupt with the country’s social codes.
In May, two male teenage Muslim students from Syria who attend a school in Therwil, Switzerland, were told they would be forced to pay a $5,000 fine if they refused to shake their female teachers’ hands, a custom in Swiss classrooms. “The public interest with respect to equality between men and women and the integration of foreigners significantly outweighs the freedom of religion,” Therwil’s local education department said in a statement at the time.
Tuareg refugees at Mbera camp in Mauritania brave the desert heat after fleeing violence in the north of Mali (MEE/Jose Cendon)-Children receive basic education at Mbera - one thing many did not have before (MEE/Jose Cendon)
A Tuareg refugee observes cattle at the Mbera camp (MEE/Jose Cendon)-More than half of refugees in Mbera are under 18 (MEE/Jose Cendon)
MBERA, Mauritania - The noon sun punches through the shroud of a leaden sky to beat mercilessly on the barren desert. What breeze drifts over the sand grits rather than soothes the eyes. Rain has not fallen here for two years.
When people move, they do so slowly; others curl up in whatever shade they can find to catch a nap. Faces project hunger and lethargy. The last few days of Ramadan are ahead, the final slog of an unforgiving month in an unforgiving environment.
But in this vast refugee camp in Mbera, 50km from the Malian border in Mauritania, 15-year-old Roghietou Himavi Valed does not complain. Her nomadic Tuareg people are used to a harsh life, a struggle that has only intensified in four years of war.
The fall of Muammar Gaddafi in 2011 sent Libya into freefall, and spread chaos across northern Africa. Weapons poured into northern Mali and emboldened Islamic militias in the Sahel – one of the world's hottest, driest and least stable regions – to spread their influence over a number of towns and villages.
Mali's army refused to aid the native Tuareg, whose own rebels were fighting a decades-long bid for autonomy from Bamako. Instead, civilians found themselves fleeing all sides to escape the crossfire.
A French intervention helped foil the rise of the Islamic militias but the war still rages in the Sahel, and camps like Mbera, a ramshackle affair now home to more than 40,000 people, are the result.
But Roghietou does not complain.
"We had to leave our home when I was a little girl. Every time I hear my village being mentioned, I am overcome with nostalgia," she says of her home near Timbuktu. "But here, I have everything I need. My entire family is with me. I don't think much about the future. Whatever will be, will be."
For one thing, there is education. Roghietou never went to school in her village - the nearest was a 6km slog - and she has only learned to read and write in exile, thanks to the efforts of humanitarian organisations in Mbera.
But aside from a few aid groups, this place is largely forgotten by the rest of the world as it fixates on the flow of refugees from Syria and Iraq. Mauritania is officially custodian of these 40,000 people but there are next to no officials to be seen.
All the bigger trees are gone, cut down for fuel or shelter, accelerating soil erosion and destroying the last vestiges of fertile land as the Sahara marches south a few kilometres a year. Dead animals litter the landscape and those left die of thirst and hunger every day.
The people of Mbera are on their own facing years in exile, drought and famine. Their one saving grace is a limited supply of underground water, perhaps the only reason the camp has grown at this place, but even that is running out.
Osman Ag Abi, a 47-year-old teacher originally from Timbuktu, says his people are resigned to a life beyond anything they knew before.
"It is clear we won't be able to return home for a long time," he says. "A number of people decided to go back, but every one of them sent word we’d do best to stay here. There is still a war going on. We all know what is taking place in the Sahara desert. The Sahel is burning. Crime, banditry, jihadism, the racism of the Malian army… We are safe here."
Safe, but changed forever.
"We are nomads," says his colleague Ahmed Ah Hamama, 73. "We follow our animals and we have little use for infrastructure. Here in the camp, our way of life has profoundly changed. We are stuck in one place, and we have slowly been turning into farmers. I have no idea what will become of us.
"Through socialising, we are getting acquainted with what they call civilisation. It is not necessarily a good thing."--A Tuareg refugee observes cattle at the Mbera camp (MEE/Jose Cendon)
On the most profound level, the refugees are as much a victim of war as of climate change. The tragedy of the Sahel region – a toxic cocktail of climate change, organised crime, ethnic and religious strife, international military interventions and hopelessly porous borders - is certain to escalate.
Being almost completely ignored by the rest of the world continues to have a profound impact on the Tuareg of Mali. Among the refugees there is constant talk of food shortages. The UN's World Food Programme had been forced to cut its food portions to one third due to lack of money.
Olivier Mirindi, a member of UNICEF's team in Bassikonou, said the lack of international recognition was affecting what aid organisations can do.
"The war in Mali is virtually forgotten. This means our budget here is in great trouble. Our capacities are severely limited. We were forced to let go many of our workers," he said.
"Serious limitations were also placed on the amount of food we can provide. And all we expect from the future are more cuts. The situation could deteriorate to the point where people's lives will come under threat."
Sebastian Laroze, the UN Refugee Agency spokesman for Mauritania, agreed. "The cuts mean the camp's very existence is in jeopardy. And things are not likely to get better."
UNHCR's projects are co-funded by the ECHO, the EU's directorate for European Civil Protection and Humanitarian Aid Operations. Without ECHO's financial assistance, the Mbera camp would probably face closure. But where would the people go?
Muhamad al-Maloud, 24, says there is nowhere. "We all want to go to Europe, but we don't have the funds. And we're all nomads - have you ever met a nomad with all the necessary papers?" he said.
"All of us are in the same situation. Northern Mali is ruled by terrorism and banditry. The Tuaregs and the Arabs are persecuted by both the jihadists and the Malian army.
"We have been stripped of everything. The Bamako authorities have always neglected us. Our entire generation has been sentenced to a life hardly worth living.
"In northern Mali, every family wakes up with one goal on their mind – how to find water. That's hardly living, is it?
"That is why so many of the young people joined the rebels. Here in this camp, each family has someone who had joined the fighting. Those men are the freedom fighters. They are fighting for independence."
And none of this is new. Mali has seen four uprisings since it won independence from France in 1960, all in the northern regions. The worst was the Tuareg rebellion of 1990 to 1995, which turned into civil war and combined with famine and a refugee crisis similar to today.
Fatma Mint Sidi, 47, originally from the Tuareg settlement of Lere, spent six years as a refugee in that earlier uprising.
"Back then I didn't have children, and my husband was still alive," she said as she batted away flies circling under her sizzling tarp. When she returned to her hometown it had been completely destroyed, and not only through war - the desert had encroached to cover it with sand.
"I realise nothing lasts forever, but I didn’t expect another war. The last one had completely changed my worldview. In the old days, we all used to help one another.
"It's much worse now than in the 1990s. There's less food and more people. The humanitarian organisations do provide help, but there isn't enough of it to go around. Sometimes the food runs out, and I have a large family to feed."
"Now I have to do everything by myself. Whatever happens is in God's hands."
Reporting from the Mbera refugee camp was made possible by the help of The European Journalism Centre (EJC)
People can carry a "silent" red hair gene that raises their risk of sun-related skin cancer, experts warn.
The Sanger Institute team estimate one in every four UK people is a carrier.
The gene's effect is comparable to two decades of sun exposure in terms of cancerous changes, they say.
While people with two copies of the gene will have ginger hair, freckles and pale skin and probably know to take extra care in the sun, those with one copy may not realise they are at risk.
Around 25% of UK adults have one version of the gene called MC1R which increases their risk of malignant melanoma.
These carriers may not always look like "easy burners", say the researchers - but they are.
Although not true redheads, they will have pale skin and some freckles and are prone to sun damage. Their natural hair colour can range from brown through to blond, sometimes with a hint of red.
The researchers looked at more than 400 tumour samples from patients who had been diagnosed with melanoma.
They found that the patients who had at least one copy of a genetic variant of MC1R had 42% more sun-associated mutations in their cancers than individuals without these variations - equivalent to the toll of an additional 21 years in the sun.
The findings, in Nature Communications, suggest that people with the red hair gene are naturally less able to protect themselves from the sun's damaging UV rays.
MC1R provides instructions for cells that produce a pigment called melanin, which is what makes skin go brown to protect it from UV damage.
The red hair gene version of MC1R does not offer much tanning or sun protection.
Skin type and risk
Type 1 - Often burns, rarely tans. Tends to have freckles, red or fair hair, blue or green eyes
Type 2 - Usually burns, sometimes tans. Tends to have light hair, blue or brown eyes
Type 3 - Sometimes burns, usually tans. Tends to have brown hair and eyes
Type 4 - Rarely burns, often tans. Tends to have dark brown eyes and hair
Type 5 - Naturally brown skin. Often has dark brown eyes and hair
Type 6 - Naturally black-brown skin. Usually has black-brown eyes and hair
Lead researcher Dr David Adams, from the Wellcome Trust Sanger Institute, said the findings reinforced the message that people need to be sun aware.
"All people, not just pale redheads, should be careful in the sun.
"It has been known for a while that a person with red hair has an increased likelihood of developing skin cancer, but this is the first time that the gene has been proven to be associated with skin cancers with more mutations.
"Unexpectedly, we also showed that people with only a single copy of the gene variant still have a much higher number of tumour mutations than the rest of the population."
Dr Julie Sharp of Cancer Research UK said: "For all of us the best way to protect skin when the sun is strong is to spend time in the shade between 11am and 3pm and to cover up with a T-shirt, hat and sunglasses.
"Sunscreen helps protect the parts you can't cover - use one with at least SPF15 and four or more stars, put on plenty and reapply regularly."
RUKI FERNANDO AND HERMAN KUMARA-on Sinhalese tourists visit the underground bunker of LTTE leader Velupillai Prabhakaran in Mullaitivu district. The completion of the northbound A9 road and the opening up of the north of Sri Lanka has bought with it a booming domestic ‘war tourism’ industry. Sinhalese people from Colombo are coming in their hundreds to see memorials to their fallen soldiers and to visit sites of the major battles. March 2012. Text and photo courtesy James Morgan.
This week, there is a major international conference on tourism, in Pasikudah, in the Batticaloa district, Eastern province of Sri Lanka. The theme is “Tourism: a Catalyst for Development, Peace and Reconciliation”. It’s organized by the UN’s World Tourism Organization (UNWTO), “the UN agency responsible for the promotion of responsible, sustainable and universally accessible tourism”, along with the Sri Lanka Tourism Development Authority (SLTDA) and the Ministry of Tourism Development and Christian Religious Affairs. The Sri Lankan President is due to attend.
Local community’s involvement in the conference
Pasikudah is a fishing village. It’s an area severely affected by the war and tsunami, with many having been killed, disappeared, injured, tortured, detained, displaced and with large number of war widows and women headed households. It had also been a popular beach for local and foreign tourists. Before the advent of large hotels owned and staffed primarily by outsiders, many local people had tried to develop their economy through small scale guest houses.
When we met fisherfolk and local guest house owners and staff last month, they didn’t know about this event, had not been consulted or invited. Organizers have opted to recommend high-end hotels owned and managed by outsiders for conference participants to stay, instead of local guest houses. Local civil society groups that we met in Batticaloa, the district capital and the closest major city to Pasikudah also didn’t know about the conference.
Those seriously affected by the three decade old war have been totally left out at a conference claiming to discuss peace, reconciliation and development. There doesn’t appear to be any opportunity for participants to listen to them and how they may view tourism and their expectations. There is also no space or focus in the agenda on gender issues.
Misleading participants
The material provided for participants by organizers, is misleading as it withholds key information about the context and background of peace and development in Sri Lanka and Pasikudah. Language has been a key issue that led to war and the organizers are incorrectly portraying that the language of the majority, Sinhalese, as the official language, at a conference held in a pre-dominantly Tamil area ravaged by the war. Numerous reports by local and international groups and the UN about the human rights situation in the past and present finds no reference in extensive pre-conference materials featuring images of sunny beaches.
Proposed pre & post conference destinations include Kandy and Nuwara Eliya, districts which grow much of Sri Lanka’s famous tea. The visit itinerary includes visits to tea factories and plantations. But it doesn’t include a visit to “line rooms”, the cramped and basic shelters where workers live. The visitors are not likely to be given opportunities to learn about the historical and ongoing socio-economic-political marginalization of tea workers, many of whom are women, on whose sweat and blood the tea industry is built on, with very little benefits to themselves.
Some major concerns about tourism and local communities
In major tourism development areas such as Pasikudah, Kalpitiya (Puttlam district, North Western Province) and Kuchaveli (Trincomalee district, Eastern Province), local communities have not been consulted and inadequate information had been provided to them about large scale tourism projects that affects their lives. Some had learnt of proposed tourist projects through prohibition notices restricting their freedom of movement. Sinhalese, Tamil and Muslim communities, men, women and children, have all been negatively affected.
Historical landscapes have been changed and mangroves destroyed due to large scale tourism projects in different parts of the country. Environmentalists had reported that the Colombo “Port City” project, which aims at high end tourists, will cause serious damage to the environment. In Kuchaveli, community playgrounds, community centres, wells close to the sea and a Hindu temple had been occupied due to tourism projects. In Kalpitiya, access to a Catholic Church had been blocked and, local communities have complained about water shortages for drinking and everyday use, due to high water consumption in hotels.
Tourism initiatives, by the military and private companies, had resulted in local populations losing their traditional lands, seriously affecting community life and cultures. Individuals and whole communities in Kuchaveli, Kalpitiya, Jaffna (Northern Province) and Panama (Ampara district, Eastern Province) have lost their traditional lands and villages due to tourism projects.
Fisherfolk in Pasikudah told us that their fisheries centres and moorings have been displaced multiple times due to building up of large hotels. The hotel hosting the conference, Amaya Beach Resort, is situated where their fisheries centre was located. The Pasikudah fisherfolk have been compelled to walk several kilometers to the present day mooring. Over 300 fisherfolk have to share a very small 300m section of the 5km long beach. In Kuchaveli nine access points to the sea has been blocked and fisherfolk have to walk about 3km to the sea. Most permanent employees in hotels appear to come from outside. Fisherfolk in Pasikudah also told us that large hotels in Pasikudah don’t purchase fish from them, but do their purchases through intermediaries. There are also questions about adequate compensation, social benefits and rights to unionize of workers employed in major hotels.
Militarization of tourism
There is a strong military presence and involvement in Northern Sri Lanka and this also extends to tourism. It’s a military which stands accused of serious and systemic human rights violations, by the local population, domestic and international human rights groups and the UN. Despite some releases in last 18 months, it continues to illegally occupy large swathes of lands belonging to Tamils. Some lands of Muslim and Sinhalese are also occupied by the military.
The military runs farms, pre-schools, shops, tourist centres, tourist resorts, restaurants, boat tours and airlines. According to organizers, conference participants will also travel by a “passenger vessel of the Navy”. In Panama and Jaffna peninsula, people were deceived into believing the Navy and Army had occupied their lands to build military bases, but subsequently discovered that these lands were used to build military run resorts.
The military has also built many monuments glorifying itself, despite many local Tamils considering them as being responsible for mass atrocities in the past. The military had bulldozed cemeteries and destroyed memorials of Tamil militants. Efforts of civilians to remember those killed and disappeared, led by Tamil political and religious leaders had been met with threats, intimidations, restrictions, surveillance and court orders banning them. Despite some improvements in last 18 months, there is no positive environment for civilian initiatives for monuments and remembrance events. Government initiatives for remembrance remains focused also on the military.
Tourism and international experiences of memorialization
Across the world, monuments of past tragedies had become major tourist attractions.Holocaust memorial in Auschwitz and across the world, Constitutional Hill (former prison) andApartheid Museum in South Africa, Tuol Sleng Genocide museum in Cambodia and thememorial at the massacre site in Gwanju, South Korea are just very few examples. They play a very important role in retaining memory, educating visitors (domestic and international) and conveying stories of experiences of survivors and victims of human rights violations and war.
One of the most striking of such memorials is in Derry, in Northern Ireland, which was badly affected by the “troubles”. A walking tour of “Derry Bogside” retraces parts of the original march and visits places where the dead and wounded fell on “Bloody Sunday”, examining its’s political and social repercussions and offering onsite experience and insights. It’s curated by the son of one of the victims and offers a unique perspective to tourists. The Museum of Free Derry tries to tell the city’s history from the point of view of the people who lived through, and were most affected, instead of “distorted version parroted by the government and most of the media”, as a step towards understanding of elements that led to the conflict.
Tourism in Sri Lanka is far from such initiatives. Less than an hour away from Pasikudah, Satharakondan and Kathankudi, there are monuments to remember massacres by the government forces and LTTE, which local Tamil and Muslim communities have built and maintain. No visits to such sites are planned in this conference to discuss “peace and reconciliation tourism”, to learn from war-affected people and express solidarity and offer encouragement and support. Instead, organizers are offering “technical tours” of several hours, to war affected Trincomalee and Jaffna. The itineraries indicate that the aim is to highlight the beauty of the place and sweep under the carpet serious human rights violations and social, economic issues affecting local people, such as unemployment, caste and gender based discrimination and violence.
Towards a more meaningful tourism
Tourism must be centered on local populations and war affected peoples. Consultations with them is crucial if tourism is to act as catalyst for peace, reconciliation and development. Tourism projects should take into account their sufferings, aspirations and support their struggles for truth, justice and economic development in a sensitive way.
Tourism must not destroy or damage socio-economic-cultural practices of local communities and uproot them from their traditional lands and livelihoods. They should not be marginalized and denied economic opportunities presented. Environmental protection is linked to community life and livelihoods and thus this is a crucial factor in any tourist projects.
Only very few individuals have obtained redress for lands they lost due to tourism projects, by going to courts. It would be important to have accessible, effective and independent grievances mechanisms, which could prevent abuses in context of tourism projects by the state or private companies, or provide redress to victims.
Government and military must not use tourism as means to promote their political agendas and propaganda. Memorials and other remembrance initiatives by local communities must be promoted and government must also initiate official monuments and remembrances focusing on civilians and all those affected.
Post-war tourism in Sri Lanka has been dominated by large scale hotel chains, investors and a powerful military machine. It’s driven by neo-liberal, capitalist economic and development policies and majoritarian Sinhalese – Buddhist ideology. It has exploited and left behind local populations in tourist sites and war affected survivors and victim’s families, in dark shadows of dispossession, displacement and marginalization. Will this conference rubber stamp and encourage this stampeding tourism train running over all before it, or will it genuinely attempt to promote peace, reconciliation and development in Sri Lanka through tourism?
Sources:
Visits and meetings with local communities by authors and colleagues
Authors visits to sites of “peace tourism” overseas
The EU has downsized its list of conditions for Sri Lanka to regain the GSP Plus benefits that it lost in 2011. At that time the EU set out a list of 15 conditions that the government had to meet if it was to retain the GSP Plus benefits. The previous government flatly refused to move on them citing national security and national sovereignty as the reasons. Ironically, when the new government made public its intentions to reapply for the GSP Plus benefits, the EU set out 58 conditions. But now it is reported the country will now only have to fulfill 15 of them. These 15 conditions include provision for independent and impartial appointments to key public positions, to repeal those sections of the Prevention of Terrorism Act (PTA) which are incompatible with the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) or amending them so as to make them clearly compatible with it, to respond to a significant number of individual cases currently pending before the UN Working Group on Enforced Disappearances; and to ensure journalists can exercise their professional duties without harassment.
It calls upon the Government to take the legislative steps necessary to allow individuals to submit complaints to the UN Human Rights Committee under the First Optional Protocol to the ICCPR and to the UN Committee against Torture (UNCAT) under Article 22. Sri Lanka acceded to first Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights in 1997. In the same year the Government of Sri Lanka recognized the competence of the UN Human Rights Committee to receive and consider communication from Sri Lankan citizens. The Supreme Court said that the President had gone beyond her powers as acceding to the protocol. This is the issue on which Prime Minister Ranil Wickremesinghe has spoken out against the decision of the Supreme Court in 2006 which said that incorporating the ICCPR into domestic law would require not only a 2/3 majority in Parliament but also passage at a referendum.
The willingness of the EU to downsize its demand on the present government could be due to its recognition of the pressures that the government is under. The shift from the longer list of 58 conditions to the revised one is reported to be due to concerns about Sri Lanka’s economic situation and about the legality and fairness of imposing more stringent criteria on the new government than what was required of the previous government. The new government has pledged to undertake three major sets of reforms and each of them is highly controversial. These are with respect to reducing the budget deficit, post-war accountability and constitutional reform. In each of these areas the centrality of the international community and the pressures it is imposing on the government have the potential to be used to raise up issues of nationalism. If the debate should shift to give primacy to nationalism, the government will be at a severe disadvantage.
TRACK RECORD
The Joint Opposition which is led by former President Mahinda Rajapaksa has a proven track record of mobilising nationalist sentiment. During the course of the war and thereafter in the immediate post-war years it utilised the power of ethnic nationalism to gain a stranglehold over politics within the country. It described the international community and the ethnic minorities as national security threats and utilised the power of the security forces to govern the country and to intimidate its political opponents. By way of contrast the present government does not falsely emphasise issues of national security and exaggerate the threats to the nation, and instead has reduced the role of the security forces in governance and restored a sense of freedom to all sectors of the population. If nationalism should become the main issue the government will find it difficult to hold back the advance of the opposition.
The vulnerability of the government’s position at the present time is that the three major issues it is grappling with are linked to pressures from the international community. The dominant issue at the present time in the public consciousness is the Value Added Tax which is extremely unpopular with the general population and also the business community. It has driven up the cost of living significantly and eroded the purchasing power of the people. It has also enabled the Joint Opposition to mobilize the discontents of shop owners in different parts of the country to protest against the tax which they find difficult to absorb as they have to compete against the informal business sector such as pavement hawkers who are not caught up in the VAT payment scheme. This discontent has permitted the Joint Opposition to ride the wave.
The government has explained the need for the additional tax revenue on the grounds that it has to repay the loans it inherited from the previous government, which borrowed heavily from international partners to put up white elephant projects. But the political implications of the present government having to deal with the financial profligacy of the previous government can be detrimental to its survival. A parallel may be drawn to the General Election of 2004 which ended in the defeat of the UNF coalition government headed by Prime Minister Ranil Wickremesinghe. One of the features at that election was the fall of traditional UNP bastions in the Western Province including Colombo suburbs. At the 2004 elections the main theme of the opposition was that the UNP government had been too subservient to international pressures. The two main issues at that election was the Ceasefire Agreement with the LTTE which was backed by the international community and the economic belt tightening blamed on the World Bank and IMF.
INTERNATIONAL PRESSURE
Once again, the opposition is making a strenuous effort to portray the international community as dictating terms to the government. This opposition effort is given traction by the fact that significant international pressure is indeed being brought to bear on Sri Lanka to deal with outstanding issues of post-war accountability. The UN High Commissioner for Human Rights Zeid Ra'ad Al Hussein has expressed his concern that Sri Lanka should honour its commitment to having international participation the accountability process. International human rights organisations and the Tamil Diaspora have joined the TNA which is locally based in Sri Lanka’s Northern and Eastern provinces in demanding a hybrid court system to deal with politically controversial issues such as who would be entrusted with the responsibility for ascertaining whether and in what circumstances the alleged war crimes took place. They have made it clear that they believe international participation should take through foreign judges sitting in judgment on cases involving war crimes.
Likewise the government’s proposed constitutional reforms have the devolution of power as a key component. The demand for a federal solution and for the merger of the Northern and Eastern provinces is an indigenous demand that has arisen from within the Tamil community in Sri Lanka. However, the ethnic majority community continues to stand opposed to a federal solution as they have been conditioned over many decades to believe that federalism is the equivalent of separation. The fact that this demand is supported by the Tamil Diaspora has enabled nationalists to argue that this too is part of an international conspiracy aimed at dividing the country.
It is in this context that the EU’s reduction in the number of conditions to achieve GSP status needs to be viewed. The reduction in the direct and visible international pressure on Sri Lanka in its efforts to resolve the problems it faces will strengthen the government’s credibility when it denies that it is being subservient to international interests. In the meantime those processes aimed at giving more ownership of Sri Lanka’s reforms to Sri Lankan people needs to be strengthened. The process of consultations that the government has planned with civil society organisations to ascertain public sentiment and influence public opinion on the constitutional reforms and reconciliation processes is important. It is an area of communication, awareness creation and advocacy that needs to be supported.
One must confess to being somewhat tickled this week by Prime Minister Ranil Wickremesinghe’s use of the Singarasa precedent in making such a sparklingly scandalous allegation as a judicial coup against Parliament.
Sorting out the fundamentals
The Speaker is now expected to rule on the relevance of Singarasa on the people’s (and the Parliament’s) sovereignty in respect of the validity and applicability of the Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) in Sri Lanka. This Protocol gives the right to Sri Lankans to file individual petitions before the juristic body of the United Nations Human Rights Committee alleging violations of ICCPR. The Committee comprising of reputed jurists and experts in turn, hands down ‘Views’ as to the measures that it recommends the State should take.
Let us first sort out a few fundamentals in this unhappily convoluted mix. In its Comments on the nature of its own authority, the Committee has been quite categorical that its ‘Views’ have no binding force within a nation-state. No new domestic ‘remedies’ are directly attracted by the Protocol. Instead, where specific domestic incorporation of international treaties is required on a country’s Constitution, it is up to each State to enact laws or reform policies.
Against that background, the Singarasa precedent handed down by a Divisional Bench under the hand of retired Chief Justice Sarath Silva in 2006 exhibited judicial adventurism of an unpleasantly novel kind. The President of Sri Lanka was pronounced to have exercised legislative power in acceding to the Protocol by promising to ‘give a remedy’ for the violation of ICCPR rights. The Court further opined that the Presidency had acted in excess of its powers in the decision to accede as the Committee had been allowed to exercise judicial power within the country.
Atrocious contradictions of international law
These views amounted to an atrocious contradiction of international law and international practice. The Singarasa ruling reverberated far beyond the facts of the particular case and indeed, beyond the national sphere. It struck a chilling blow to the very basis of Sri Lanka’s adherence to international law.
In fact, both the Kumaratunga Presidency which had acceded to the ICCPR Protocol in the late nineties on the sagacious advice of the late Lakshman Kadirgamar, then Foreign Minister and the later short lived United National Front government under Ranil Wickremesinghe had airily ignored the Committee’s ‘Views.’ But no visible displeasure was evidenced from the UN system, other than protests by advocates monitoring the process.
But a Government’s amnesia is entirely different to the highest Court of the land proclaiming that the very act of Presidential accession to the Protocol was unconstitutional. Notoriously slow to intervene in the internal judicial functioning of a member state, jurisprudential organs of the United Nations woke up and started rubbing their eyes. From demonstrating a healthy and measured approach to international law by judges who once stood their own in the Commonwealth, the Sri Lankan judiciary began to be eyed askance with a degree of startled alarm.
Reaffirming state commitment to the ICCPR
At the time, reactions to the Singarasa precedent within the country were muted. Indeed, yahapalanaya ‘born-again’ corruption crusaders from the Attorney General’s Department gleefully hinted before the Supreme Court that the UN Committee was made up of nonentities. Senior lawyers from the unofficial Bar whose knowledge of international law was sketchy at the best, defended the indefensible. In academia which should have engaged in exceedingly sober discussion of a dangerous precedent, silence prevailed in the main.
In that sense, the Prime Minister’s statement on the floor of the House that ‘the Court meandered into a totally irrelevant area,’ holding forth on the constitutional competence of the President’ is understandable. Thus the acerbic note that ‘the Supreme Court does not have the power to violate the basic tenants of the Constitution which unfortunately the SC had been doing in the last decade.’
But while the reaffirming of State commitment to the implementation of the ICCPR is reassuring, parts of that statement invoke concern. Indeed, we are familiar with the concept of people’s sovereignty being commonly and cynically tossed about at various points of time to aid a particular argument, judicial or parliamentary as the case may be. As a case in point, Articles 3 and 4 of the Constitution on the separation of powers cited by the Prime Minister constituted the very same basis on which the Silva Court handed down the Singarasa decision in the first instance.
Eschewing short term ‘solutions’
Granted, as long as the Singarasa precedent is in force, Sri Lanka’s signing of international conventions would have no effect. And the predicament of the Government in hesitating to go the correct way, namely in inviting a Full Bench of the Court to reconsider this decision, is obvious.
But the Prime Minister’s stress on the ‘parliamentary exercise’ of judicial power is worrying. Of course Sri Lanka’s parliament is no stranger to the unedifying practice of ‘legislative judgments.’ Barely three months after a new Constitution was promulgated in 1978, a Parliament under the iron Presidential hand of the late JR Jayawardene nullified an appellate court ruling that a Special Presidential Commission of Inquiry inquiring into the actions of former Prime Minister Sirimavo Bandaranaike could not be vested with retrospective powers. Similar precedents have been evidenced in earlier times.
Yet this political undermining of constitutional norms is precisely why the very idea of the Constitution has lost all meaning for Sri Lankans, from the North to the South. And as Humpty Dumpty realized full well at a point, all the ‘king’s horses and all the king’s men’ could not restore public faith in that regard.
A palpable irony
Wrongs of the past must be corrected. But notwithstanding the classic Scylla and Charybdis dilemma faced by this Government, short term and expedient measures is not the way to go. This ‘solution’ would be as perilous as President Maithripala Sirisena dismissing a Chief Justice by executive fiat last year with an ingratiating Bar and sundry lawyers groups cheering on the sidelines. This controversy of a ‘judicial coup’ emanating from the Singarasa precedent has surfaced exactly at the same time that the Government advances a package of constitutional reforms before the people.
Surely that palpable irony should not be lost on us.
