Tuesday, January 17, 2017

Nearly 40 traffickers convicted in Karnataka in rare success for prosecutors

By Anuradha Nagaraj-Tue Jan 17, 2017

CHENNAI (Thomson Reuters Foundation) - Nearly 40 people were found guilty on Tuesday of buying and selling girls in Karnataka, signalling a rare victory for prosecutors in a country where fewer than two in five trafficking cases ends in a conviction.

Human traffickers, pimps and brothel owners were among the 39 people convicted by a district court in Ballari with sentencing due on Wednesday, according to prosecutor Rathod Ramsingh, who said he hoped the verdict would deter others.

"Normally only the pimps get picked up but this time everyone involved in buying, selling and reselling of these girls has been found guilty," Ramsingh told the Thomson Reuters Foundation.

The prosecution came after Ballari police raided several brothels in 2013, rescuing 43 women and 21 children, including a 13-year-old, and seizing evidence including cash and account ledgers.

Seven of the rescued victims were from Bangladesh and the rest were from Andhra Pradesh, Telangana, West Bengal, Karnataka and Odisha.

A further 48 suspects in the case are being tried in three separate cases in Karnataka.

Of an estimated 20 million commercial sex workers in India, 16 million women and girls are victims of sex trafficking, according to non-governmental organisations working in the country.

The U.S. State Department said in its 2016 Trafficking in Persons report that investigations,

prosecutions and convictions for human trafficking were low in India even though the government has stepped up its law enforcement efforts.

Of the 2,075 human trafficking cases that were prosecuted in 2015, 824 ended in a conviction, according to India's national crime records bureau.

Campaigners welcomed Tuesday's verdict, saying it should encourage other victims to come forward.

"This conviction is because of the courage of the survivors, all young women, who walked into the packed courtroom to identify their traffickers and the men who abused them," said Adrian Phillips of non-profit Justice and Care that worked with the police on the case.

"Offenders who previously assumed they would get away with the crime will now know otherwise."

(Reporting by Anuradha Nagaraj, Editing by Katie Nguyen)

Burma: Rights groups urge govt to probe case of missing Kachin Christian leaders

17th January 2017

HUMAN Rights Watch (HRW) and Fortify Rights yesterday called on the government of Burma (Myanmar) to launch an immediate investigation into the whereabouts of two Kachin Baptist Church leaders who disappeared on Dec 24.

The rights groups said the two men were last seen near a military outpost in Shan State’s Mong Koe township.

“The apparent enforced disappearance of these two Christian leaders has created a climate of fear and terror in Northern Shan State,” said Matthew Smith, chief executive officer of Fortify Rights.

“The government should urgently investigate and report on this case and ensure protection for those with information.”

Langjaw Gam Seng, 35, and Dumdaw Nawng Lat, 65, went missing after assisting journalists who were reporting on military abuses in the state. Their fate and whereabouts remains unknown with HRW fearing that they may have been victim to enforced disappearance and the violation of various rights protected under international law.

Despite repeated enquiries to the local Myo Ma police station in Muse Township by the Kachin Baptist Convention (KBC), the religious group in which both men were working, no information on the couple’s whereabouts has come to light.

The pair were reported missing by family members on Jan 3, thirteen days after they were last seen traveling by motorbike towards Byuha Gon base, where Burmese Army Battalions Nos. 99 and 55 are located.

SEE ALSO: Burma: Kokang conflict shows little sign of abating

It is believed that, on the evening of Dec 24, Langjaw Gam Seng received a phone call from a person claiming to be a member of the Burmese military. The caller reportedly requested that both Langjaw Gam Seng and his cousin Dumdaw Nawng Lat go to the Byuha Gon military base in Northern Shan State’s Mong Ko town under the guise of assisting in the release of civilians detained on the base.

However the military has since denied detaining the men and the government is claiming that they were taken by the Kachin Independence Army, not the military.

The Northern Shan state where the two were working at the time of their disappearance has experienced clashes recently between the Burmese military and the Brotherhood of the Northern Alliance (BNA), a coalition of four ethnic armed groups.

Allegations of airstrikes carried out by the Burmese military surfaced in November and December 2016. They are purported to have destroyed civilian structures including the St. Francis Xavier Catholic Church in Mong Ko; the destruction of which was recorded by one of the journalists that Gam Seng and Nwang Lat were helping.

SEE ALSO: Burma military admits airstrikes against Kachin rebels

The journalist was warned by the township administrator not to publish the evidence, however, the photographs appeared online several days later.

Despite the Burmese military publicly denying the allegations of airstrikes on Dec 18, it later came to light that the military had written to Catholic Bishop Philip Za Hawng on Dec 8 accepting responsibility and agreeing to rebuild the church.

It is in this environment of allegations and uncertainty in which the two went missing.

For many years, allegations have been brought against the Burmese military for their misconduct in the Northern Shan and Kachin States. Civil society organizations have documented unlawful killings, torture, rape, forced labour, and other abuses committed against civilians in the region.

Both Fortify Rights and HRW have collected evidence of wrongdoing in the area including the displacement of tens of thousands of people and the destruction of homes, and the systematic use of torture and other degrading treatment or punishment of more than sixty civilians by government forces during fighting in northern Burma from June 2011 to April 2014

SEE ALSO: Burma: UN rights envoy arrives amid Rohingyan crisis, report of abuse

Despite these widespread allegations, Yanghee Lee, the United Nations Special Rapporteur on human rights in Burma, was recently denied access by the government to Shan State during her 12-day monitoring mission to the country.

“Perpetrators of grievous abuses in Kachin and Shan States need to be brought to justice,” Phil Robertson, deputy Asia director at HRW, said. “Atrocities won’t stop so long as the military can commit them against civilians with impunity.”

Women's March on Washington: What You Need to Know

By KATIE ROGERS JAN. 10, 2017

The Women’s March on Washington, a project that began with a Facebook page in the hours after the election of Donald J. Trump, quickly grew into a movement.

Many thousands of people could visit Washington to march on Jan. 21, the day after the inauguration. Here’s what we know about the event so far. We’ll update as we learn more.

And if you are going, The Times wants to hear from you

Where are they marching?Are any bold-face names attending the march?Are men invited?How are people getting there?

Why are people marching?

From the beginning, the purpose of this march has been to challenge Mr. Trump’s administration.

“We’re doing it his very first day in office because we are making a statement,” one organizer, Breanne Butler, said in an interview days after the election. Of the the marginalized groups she accused Mr. Trump of attacking during his campaign, she said, “We are here and we are watching. And, like, ‘Welcome to the White House.’”

As the women’s group has become more organized, four co-chairwomen have refined the mission to specifically elevate groups like immigrants and minorities. Groups focused on immigration rights, including Define American and United We Dream, are partners with the group. Abortion rights will also be on the agenda: Naral Pro-Choice America and Planned Parenthood are both encouraging people to attend.

More than 30 other groups have joined as partners, including the Muslim Women’s Alliance, the Trayvon Martin Foundation, Girls Who Code and Black Girls Rock.How many people will be there?

Cassady Fendlay, a spokeswoman for the organizers of the march, said that as many as 200,000 people could participate. She said organizers did not have a firm figure, but that they were monitoring replies to their invitations on Facebook and Eventbrite.

Law enforcement authorities in Washington are planning for a crowd that could swell to 400,000, according to Christopher T. Geldart, the director of homeland security for the District of Columbia. He said his office was monitoring reservations on Amtrak, for charter buses and for motel and hotel rooms, as well as comparing the event to previous marches to better estimate the size of the coming crowd.

He said his office was also planning for the possibility that other demonstrations could occur that day.

“We’re basically not going to stand anything down after the inauguration,” Mr. Geldart said, referring to the additional police and National Guard units that will be in the capital to assist local law enforcement authorities. “We’re leaving that stuff in place.”

The march will start at 10 a.m. at Independence Avenue and Third Street S.W., near the National Museum of the American Indian. Participants will hold several events for an hour or two before the march begins, Ms. Fendlay said. The final route has not yet been determined.

The event could last until 5 p.m.

The march does not yet have a confirmed host or M.C., and it is still unclear what sort of program will be offered. Gloria Steinem and Harry Belafonte are honorary co-chairs, but Mr. Belafonte, 89, had not decided if he will attend, his assistant, Ingrid Ellis, said Monday.

On their social media accounts, the actresses Julianne Moore and Jessica Chastain and the comedian Amy Schumer are among celebrities who have said they would attend.

Of course.

Any way they can. Buses seem to be a popular mode of transportation. Rallybus is one site marchers are using to find transportation.

Marchers will also be arriving from outside the United States. Julie Buchanan, an organizer in Toronto, said in an email that she was among 53 people chartering a bus for the trip to Washington.

Karin Blake Grana wrote in an email that she and a friend were flying in from Oslo to march. “We booked our plane tickets less than a week after the election,” Ms. Grana wrote. “We are that gung-ho.”

For those who cannot make it to Washington, sister marches are being organized all over the world, from Los Angeles to Oklahoma City to Athens. For those who still want to try to make it to the march in Washington, a site called MarchMatch.org is trying to help match travelers with carpools. One caveat:

The website is not affiliated with the march and hasn’t been vetted for safety, Ms. Fendlay said.

NYT

Tags:Democratic governance, Donald Trump, Human Rights, USA, Women’s RightsPREVIOUS POSTSri Lanka: Lessons from the conviction of six police officers to death

Bug resistant to all antibiotics kills woman

By James Gallagher-13 January 2017

A superbug that could not be treated with 26 different antibiotics has killed a woman in the US, officials report.

The 70-year-old from Nevada had returned to the US in August with an infected swelling in her right hip after a long stay in India.

She died in September.

A Centers for Disease Control and Prevention report said the infection was "resistant to all available antimicrobial drugs".

The Antibiotic Apocalypse

The women had repeatedly needed hospital treatment in India after breaking her right leg. An infection got into the bone and then spread to her hip.

She was seriously ill when she arrived in a US hospital - her immune system was going into overdrive in an attempt to fight the infection causing inflammation throughout her body.

This escalated and ultimately she died from septic shock.

Samples of the infection taken from the wound were sent to the CDC for testing.

They showed she was infected with Klebsiella pneumoniae - which normally lives in the gut without causing disease.

The analysis found the superbug was resistant to all 26 available antibiotics in the US including the "drug of last resort" - colistin.

Global travel factor

The CDC said: "[Infections] that are resistant to all antimicrobials are very uncommon."

But the case remains a warning of the dangers of what the CDC calls untreatable "nightmare bacteria".

Some scientists have argued we are on the cusp of the "post-antibiotic era" with cases like this in Nevada becoming more frequent.

Dr David Brown, chief scientist at Antibiotic Research UK, said: "It is still quite unusual for a bacterial infection to be resistant to such a large number of antibiotics.

"Fortunately it is an extreme case, but it may soon become all too common.

"It happened because of her personal history of multiple hospitalisations in India, however, the ease of global travel does mean that such cases will increase."

'Dire outcome'

The tests showed the bacteria did have low levels of resistance to fosfomycin - but that is approved in the US only as an oral treatment for uncomplicated cystitis.

Prof Laura Piddock, from Antibiotic Action and the University of Birmingham, said: "Despite such multi-drug resistant bacteria being rare, this report is a salutary tale of the dire outcome for some patients when potentially useful drugs are not available.

"In circumstances such as this, where doctors are faced with the inability to treat a life-threatening infection, they need the flexibility to use antibiotics licensed for use in other countries and shown to be active in the laboratory against the patient's infecting bacterium."

Follow James on Twitter.

Monday, January 16, 2017

CTF report and the Raviraj case judgement

Tuesday, 17 January 2017

The Report of the Consultation Task Force on Reconciliation Mechanisms was handed over to former President Chandrika Kumaratunga by Task Force Chairperson Manouri Muttetuwegama on 3 January.

The Consultation Task Force (CTF) had Zonal Task Forces operating in all the districts, gathered views from the people and prepared a detailed report elaborating on the Office of Reparations; Truth, Justice, Reconciliation and Non-Recurrence Commission; Office of Missing Persons; Judicial Mechanism; Transitional Justice beyond the four Mechanisms; and Support for affected individuals and communities-Physiological considerations and security.

It was an elaboration of suffering of the victims in all communities, Sinhala Tamil and Muslim. Not only that, it elaborated the suffering of the soldiers and the ex-militants of the LTTE as well. We need to consider the psychological support needed by all, victims, ex-militants and the soldiers. The previous Government discontinued the psychological support given to the soldiers who were involved in the operations.

In the report it was stated that the security forces and police warned that this process of reconciliation would be counterproductive, compromise national security, deepen wounds and open new ones as well as exacerbate inter-ethnic and religious division. All security forces personnel categorically rejected international involvement in the accountability mechanism in particular. (Executive Summary B3)

The CTF also received submissions, largely from the Sinhala community, rejecting any international involvement in what they viewed as a purely domestic process. (Executive summary C23)

Leader of the Opposition R. Sampanthan addressing the gathering on 3 January said that there was no possibility of levelling charges against the forces who fought the war against the LTTE on the orders of the democratically-elected Government of Sri Lanka. However, if any officer or soldier has killed those who were arrested or raped women, then it was a war crime. The law should be implemented against such persons and it is not going against the forces who fought the war. (Samabima Supplement, Ravaya 8 January)

This is the truth and we should appreciate that it comes from the Leader of the Tamil National Alliance. This statement should be given wide publicity but the Government failed to do so.

According to the report, the Army representatives stated their support for a truth-seeking process and if there is any evidence of criminal activity, for the prosecution of the guilty. Given that as far as they were concerned no criminal activity had been undertaken, they saw no need for amnesty either. (Executive Summary B4)

Therefore the thinking of the Opposition Leader and the Army seems to be somewhat in line. This examination is needed because there were wild accusations levelled against the Government forces. Due credit was not given to the forces internationally for defeating the LTTE which was considered undefeatable.

CTF recommends a hybrid court with a majority of national judges as well as a sufficient number of international judges. (Executive Summary C24)

The Daily Mirror reported on 6 January as follows:

Quote

Justice Minister Wijeyadasa Rajapakshe today said he had no confidence in the Consultation Task Force on Reconciliation Mechanisms (CTF) appointed by the Prime Minister. He said the CTF, which recommended the inclusion of at least one international judge on every bench set up to hear allegations of war crimes and the violation of human rights that had taken place during the final stages of the armed conflict in Sri Lanka. The Minister said some of the members of the CTF Committee were representatives of Non-Governmental Organisations (NGO). “No one is complaining about the independence of the Judiciary anymore. We have reconciliation and peace processes in place. This report, at this juncture, is totally unwarranted. Therefore, we don’t have to follow these recommendations by the CTF,” he told the Daily Mirror.

Unquote

As former President Kumaratunga stated, he was there at the Cabinet meeting where the forming of CTF was discussed. He also tried to bring down the NGO phobia of the Rajapaksa regime. He has thrown away the entire report just because of the recommendation of the international judges. Independence of the Judiciary can be restored by refraining from giving calls to the Judiciary from President’s House or from Temple Trees but the restoration of the impartiality of the Judiciary is not that easy. No one complains about the independence of the Judiciary but there are questions of impartiality of the same.

On 25 December 2016 the Daily Mirror reported as follows:

Quote

Jaffna District TNA Parliamentarian M.A. Sumathiran said yesterday that his political party was not satisfied with the verdict in the former Parliamentarian Nadaraja Raviraj’s assassination case and would file an appeal against the verdict.

“The judgment is indicative of the people’s distrust in the country’s Judiciary. It is in this scenario that we demand an international panel of judges to probe the alleged war crimes. As the lawyer who watched the interests of the aggrieved party, I will file an appeal,” he said.

Unquote

On 26 December 2016, The Hindu reported as follows:

Quote

“So it was obvious that a few junior-level naval officers had not done this on their own. They are as responsible for carrying out someone’s orders, but it is only one small part of the puzzle. This happened 10 years ago and we are still waiting to find out who gave the orders,” Sumanthiran told The Hindu on Sunday.

Unquote

On 12 January the Daily Mirror reported:

Quote

The Attorney General has appealed to the Colombo High Court against its judgement in the former TNA Jaffna District Parliamentarian Raviraj murder case and for a re-opening of the case for a retrial. The AG by the revision application filed in High Court had stated that on the day the decision of the Judge was pronounced in the case, the court has functioned further than the usual functioning time till midnight. The AG also had stated in the revision application that the presiding judge had not made any explanations on certain vital issues revealed in the trial.

Unquote

The jury comprised all Sinhalese people. Here the three Navy Intelligence officers also were accused. Not only in this case but also the cases of Prageeth Eknaligoda and Lasantha Wickrematunge where intelligence officers were accused, there were long delays of the judicial process. Once the President has openly accused the prosecution officers.

Therefore we do not have any moral ground to defend the position that there should not be any foreign judges in the investigation of so-called war crimes. Justice should not only to be done but also be seen to be done.

Proposed Constitution somewhat Similar to APRC Proposals - Says Sumanthiran

Tamil National Alliance (TNA) MP for the Jaffna District M.A. Sumanthiran, in an interview with the Daily Mirror, shares his views on the Constitution making and the way forward. He says his party remains optimistic about a positive outcome.
Excerpts:

Tuesday, 17 January 2017

Q How optimistic are you of the Constitution making process?

Well, this is a one’s in life opportunity. It is, in fact, once in the life of a country opportunity. This problem has been with us ever since Independence. Every time, when the party in office makes any effort to resolve it, the party in the Opposition opposed. It happened in 1957, 1965 and went on like that. After many consequences, particularly large scale violence, there was a process from 1994 to 2000 to build a Constitution. But, in August 2000, when a bill was brought to Parliament, the main Opposition opposed. The party came to power within two years of that and took some efforts by signing a Cease Fire Agreement (CFA). Then again, it was moved out of power by the other party.

Proposed Constitution somewhat Similar to APRC Proposals.docx by Thavam Ratna on Scribd

The Constitutional Process Gives Sri Lanka A Real Chance

By Veluppillai Thangavelu –January 16, 2017

Veluppillai Thangavelu

The Constitutional Process Gives Sri Lanka a Real Chance to Move Forward or Get Stuck in the Troubled Past

The year 2017 is a make or break year for the National Unity government and the Tamil people. In the history of Sri Lanka, an attempt is made for the third time after independence to enact a new constitution to resolve three major protracted issues facing the country. They are (1) devolution of power, (2) electoral reform, and (3) restructuring the executive presidential system.

Undoubtedly, devolution of power is the critical and the fundamental element of the constitution making process. It directly affects the future political and economic well being of not only the

Tamil people, but the entire people of Sri Lanka. Power sharing has become a contentious issue right after independence and continues to pose a challenge to ethnic reconciliation.

The major difference between the 1972 and 1978 constitution is the participation of elected representatives of the Tamil people in the constitutional process. The previous constitutions completely ignored demands by the Tamil people for power sharing. Maximum autonomy for the Tamil people in their traditional habitat to manage their own affairs under a federal structure.
Anton Balasingham proposed to G.L. Peiris the chief negotiator for government of Srilanka “To explore a possible solution based on internal self determination of Tamils on a federal basis to lands of historic habitation of Tamil speaking people”. An agreement was reached between the LTTE and the UNP-led United National Front (UNF) government in December, 2002 at the third round of talks at Oslo. It was popularly called the Oslo Declaration and the Minister of Constitutional Affairs Prof. Peiris hailed the agreement as a ‘paradigm shift’ on Sri Lanka’s vexed ethnic question.

The agreement stated “Responding to a proposal by the leadership of the LTTE, the parties have agreed to explore a political solution founded on the principle of internal self-determination in areas of historical habitation of the Tamil-speaking peoples, based on a FEDERAL structure within a united Sri Lanka. The parties acknowledged that the solution has to be acceptable to all communities.” Federalism became entrenched in the political discourse in Sri Lanka’s political circles when it was endorsed at the Tokyo donor conference in 2003. The Tokyo Declaration, signed by 70 state and multilateral donors, commended the LTTE and the Colombo government “for their commitment to a lasting and negotiated peace based on a federal structure within a united Sri Lanka.”

However, G.L. Peiris has since made a U turn distancing himself from the terms of the Oslo Agreement, saying words like federalism and unitary were “meaningless.” Likewise, the United National Party led by Ranil Wickremesinghe also ditched the federal constitutional model as a solution in 2007 due to repeated defeats at the polls. However, Ravi Karunanayake, UNP MP claimed “Our party stands for maximum devolution of power and when the Ceasefire Agreement was signed by the UNP government of 2001 we did not have a Federal solution in mind, but only a mode of maximum devolution of power to solve the problem.” The UNP came under mounting pressure from its rank and file to reclaim the Sinhala nationalist vote by swinging to the right.

The first attempt at decentralising powers within the framework of a unitary constitution was through 13A in 1987. Though inadequate, the provincial councils were considered as autonomous bodies and are not under any Ministry. It derives its authority and power from the Constitution and Acts of Parliament. Undertakes activities which had earlier been undertaken by the Central Government Ministries, Departments, Corporations and Statutory Authorities. But, provincial council’s powers were restricted or diluted because of (1) the inclusion of the concurrence list, and (2) the vesting of executive powers on the Governor and (3) failure on the part of the government to implement the appointment of Land and Police Commissions. Though, ex president Mahinda Rajapaksa made a commitment to UN Secretary Ban-Ki-moon in May, 2009 that he will introduce amendment to the 13A + he never kept his word.

The administration of the provincial councils depends extensively on the goodwill of the central government. Powers devolved under the 13th Amendment were insufficient as the central government maintains a strict control over important subjects of power sharing through the Concurrent List.

The current attempt at drawing a new constitution has been made possible because of the election of Maithripala Sirisena as president in January, 2015 and the change of regime in August of the same year. It was exactly a year ago on January 20; a Resolution on the making of a Constitution was moved in Parliament by the Prime Minister in the parliament. The Resolution converted the parliament into a Constitutional Assembly (CA) comprising all the members of the parliament but sits as a separate body. It is tasked with enacting a new constitution.

By: PTI-16/01/2017

sri lanka, sri lanka constitution, sri lanka TNA, sri lanka news, world news The protest in Sri Lanka were led by Northern Province Chief Minister C V Wigneswaran.

Sri Lanka’s main Tamil party TNA will not be a part of the ongoing constitution-making process and will quit if the government abandons the idea of finding a political solution to the Tamil issue and more devolution is not considered, a senior party leader has said. “We have a mandate from the people for a federal constitution with the merger of North and East to resolve the National question. Discussions are underway with the government on how best to come to an agreement. We cannot accept the 13th Amendment as a comprehensive power sharing mechanism,” said senior Tamil National Alliance (TNA) member Dharmalingam Siddharthan.

“If the Government abandoned the idea of finding a solution for the National question, we won’t be part of the Constitution making process and we would be compelled to leave it,” Siddharthan was quoted as saying by the Sunday Times.

The report said the TNA had been pressing for a power sharing arrangements in the new constitution. It wants a system in a merged north and east provinces based on a federal structure.

However, the south-based Sinhala majority parties are averse to even discussing a federal solution to the Tamil minority issue.

President Maithripala Sirisena addressing a political gathering in the southern district of Galle Saturday ruled out a federal solution.

Referring to what he termed “misinformation” carried out in the media by political opponents, Sirisena said “my government will never agree to grant federalism in this country”.

Six sub-committees which sought public opinion on different areas of the proposed constitution have reported their findings to the main steering committee. Parliament is to be reconvened as a constitutional assembly to discuss the proposals.

The meeting which should have happened last week did not take place due to a reported disagreement between the two main partners in the ruling coalition, President Sirisena’s Freedom Party and the premier Ranil Wickremesinghe’s United National Party.

Sirisena’s SLFP is of the view that the existing 1978 constitution could be amended without going for changes which require a national referendum. The new Constitution will replace the current executive president headed constitution adopted in 1978.

The government expects the new Constitution to address the demand of Tamil minorities for political recognition. With the defeat of the Tamil Tigers in 2009 the Tamil groups have opted for maximum devolution as opposed to LTTE’s goal of a separate Tamil homeland.

NIE

Government needs to take on the challenge of the consultation task force report

By Jehan Perera-January 16, 2017

The disquiet about the government’s commitment to deliver on its promises is now extending itself to those sections of the international community that gave their support to the government on the basis of its commitment to human rights and reconciliation. The sense of disenchantment amongst the general population is also getting more pronounced. The common factor is the failure of the government to deliver on its promises. With regard to the general population it is the continuing failure to deliver economic development that directly benefits those who depend on governmental largesse to get them out of poverty. It is also the ineffectiveness of the government’s anti-corruption programme that is reflected in the failure to take cases through to their conclusion.

However, with regard to the international human rights community, and Western governments, the focus is more on the slow pace of reconciliation initiatives that have an impact on those who have long been victims of the conflict. This sentiment is not confined to the international community but also includes the ethnic minorities who are beginning to feel more convinced that their interests are being neglected by the government in order to cater to ethnic majority sentiment. They are even beginning to see overtly hostile intent in actions such as the presidential declaration that extends forest cover (Wilpattu) to areas in the North that have been sites of traditional settlement by the ethnic minorities, in this case primarily the Muslims, prior to their displacement by the war.

The negative reception extended by members of the government to the report of the Consultation Task Force on reconciliation mechanisms has added to the sense of disquiet within the international community and ethnic minorities. The government-appointed Task Force obtained submissions from the general public, many of whom were directly affected by the three decades of war. The Task Force focused its findings on the commitments made by the government to the UN Human Rights Council in Geneva in October 2015. The government’s commitments included setting up four new reconciliation mechanisms, namely a truth commission, an office of missing persons, an office of reparations and a special court to try war crimes. The government also pledged to make the laws more human rights-friendly and to demilitarize the former war zones of the North and East.

POLITICALLY CONTROVERSIAL

The Task Force recommendations have met with the support and appreciation of the international human rights community and the ethnic minorities. The recommendations seek to meet international standards. The report itself provides material that is invaluable in terms of concepts and cases that could be used for a public education campaign. However, the lukewarm if not negative response from those in the government is clearly visible. The problem that the government seems to be having is that the Task Force recommendations do not correspond to the general sentiment in the ethnic majority Sinhalese population. This is especially true of the recommendation that there should be international participation in the proposed special courts, with its provision for foreign judges, prosecutors and investigators. The adverse media focus on the hybrid court structure recommended by the Task Force has deflected public attention away from all other recommendations.

The Task Force recommendation of hybrid courts follows its observation that there is a near total lack of confidence in the Tamil polity and in victims of human rights violations in the impartiality of the Sri Lankan judicial system where it concerns the security forces. There are several cases where the defendants who were members of the security forces have been acquitted by the courts. The most recent example is the case of assassinated Jaffna parliamentarian Raviraj. The security forces are today routinely described as war heroes by government and opposition leaders for having won the war. The issue is whether the judicial system can ignore the factor of ethnicity unless state institutions, including the judicial system, are reformed to ensure justice in the context of a multi ethnic and multi religious society.

The challenge for the government will be to take the recommendations of the Task Force and implement them in a manner that is politically viable. The government’s hold on power is stable so long as the two main coalition partners, the UNP and SLFP, are in agreement. The difficulty that the government seems to be having is that it needs to persuade the SLFP component of the government, which is now headed by President Sirisena, to go along with politically controversial decisions that are taken in regard to inter-ethnic relations. Where constitutional reform is concerned, the SLFP has already stated its position in a conservative manner. They have said that they will not go beyond the unitary state and are not in favour of ratifying constitutional change through a referendum which reduces the scope for reform. The government’s continual postponement of local government elections over the past two years is an indication of its reluctance to face the electorate at this time.

COSTLY FAILURE

On the other hand, any failure on the part of the government to deliver on its promises can also be politically costly to it in the longer term. The government has to be cognizant that its candidate won the presidential election in January 2015 due to the wholehearted support given to it by the ethnic minority political parties and voters. The support of the ethnic minority parties can also be important in those instances where the two major political parties are in opposition to one another. At the present time, these two parties, the UNP and SLFP, are in coalition so the importance of the ethnic minority parties in order to secure a majority in parliament is not there. However, this situation could change in the future. The ethnic minority vote also becomes very important during a presidential election, when the entire country votes as a single electorate, and every vote counts as witnessed at the presidential election of 2015.

The failure of the government to deliver on its promises can also be costly in terms of international support. The government is on the verge of obtaining the GSP Plus tariff concessions from the EU which it lost six years ago. It is reported that 50,000 jobs in the apparel industry alone were lost as a result. The finance minister has said that regaining the tariff concession will mean an additional income of Rs 2 billion to the country. While the European Commission, which is the administrative arm of the EU, has recommended the restoration of the GSP privilege, this has to be ratified by the EU parliament, which is a political body. If the EU finds that the government view on the implementation of the Task Force report corresponds to the critical views that have emerged from within the government so far, it can lead to a political decision being made in Brussels that will be adverse to the grant of the tariff concession.

In this context there are two campaigns that the government has to speedily embark upon. The first is to persuade the international community that the government’s dominance over the polity is by no means an assured fact. The government needs to constantly take the majority of people with it, especially with regard to measures that are controversial and arouse deep seated emotions. This is no easy task when nationalist forces are waiting in the wings for a takeover. The second campaign for the government to undertake would be with the general population, to persuade them that the recommendations of the Consultation Task Force on reconciliation mechanisms are in accordance with the government’s commitments to the international community. The government needs to convince the people that these commitments are in the best interests of the country. This may not be as difficult as it seems, because most people do want justice and reconciliation to be the heritage of all.