Spiraling incidents of military intimidation in the North: Ruki Fernando

 

Expose` : Good governance commander in chief completes two years but MR ‘s control still within army !

Featured image courtesy Tamil Guardian

RAISA WICKREMATUNGE on 03/10/2017

There have been increased incidents of military intimidation in the last couple of weeks in areas like Pilakudiyirippu (near Keppapulavu), Paravipaanchan in Kilinochchi, and Puthukkudiyiruppu – former military held lands which have been released to former residents after sustained protests, human rights activist Ruki Fernando said.

Spiraling incidents of military intimidation in the North.docx by Thavam Ratna on Scribd

Not ‘all is forgiven’ for asylum seekers returned to Sri Lanka

Expose` : Good governance commander in chief completes two years but MR ‘s control still within army !

by Niro Kandasamy-Mar 10, 2017

( March 10, 2017, Melbourne, Sri Lanka Guardian) In his recent visit to Australia, the prime minister of Sri Lanka, Ranil Wickremesinghe, urged Sri Lankan asylum seekers to “come back, all is forgiven”. He went on to say: 

They can come back to Sri Lanka and we will help them.

Immigration department figures show as of January 2017, there were 86 Sri Lankan adult men in detention facilities. In community detention, there are 24 adult men, 19 women, 28 boys and 15 girls from Sri Lanka.

Every one of these people are still undergoing the refugee determination process. This means there is still a risk they may be sent back to their home country if found not to be “genuine refugees”.

Last year, the Australian government controversially sent back a boat carrying 12 Sri Lankan asylum seekers. Wickremesinghe’s reassurances echo those of Tony Abbott some years ago.

The former Abbott government consistently deemed it safe to return Sri Lankan nationals to the country, saying the civil war had ended and the country was “at peace”.

In 2014, one boat of 153 Tamil asylum seekers were intercepted at sea by Australian customs vessels and returned to Sri Lanka. Another boat carrying 28 Sri Lankan nationals were handed over to Sri Lankan authorities.

The Australian government is aware that returning people to a country where they face harm is in breach of international law and the UN Refugee Convention, to which it is a signatory.

There is mounting evidence suggesting that, during Abbott’s tenure, asylum seekers returned to Sri Lanka faced torture. There is little reason to believe much has changed since.

What’s happening in Sri Lanka?

In January 2015, Sri Lanka had a leadership change. This was generally viewed as positive for the country: a new beginning in a post-armed conflict setting.

However, things quickly turned when the new leadership showed little signs of making meaningful improvements to its transitional justice agenda. This included changing the country’s laws regarding returned asylum seekers or even considering this a priority.

When asked whether it was safe for asylum seekers to return to Sri Lanka, Wickremesinghe responded:

We just started a missing persons office. It is quite safe for them to come back.

This office was established last year to investigate the disappearance of people – mainly Tamils – during the decades of fighting between the Sri Lankan government and Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE) that ended in 2009.

The outcomes of the Office of Missing Persons are questionable. There have been 20,000 cases of missing persons recorded, while not a single person listed as missing has been traced since the new government took office. Families of those missing continue to hold demonstrations to seek answers about their loved ones.

Emerging evidence challenges reconciliation efforts with the Tamil minority community and strongly argues against returning asylum seekers to Sri Lanka – in striking contrast to the views of the Australian government.

Human rights abuses

In December 2016, an official UN report on Sri Lanka showed evidence of male and female torture. This was from various periods during and after the conflict, as well as recent cases in 2015 and 2016. Medical examinations of survivors confirmed physical injuries that were consistent with their interviews.

The report highlights evidence of sexual and gender-based violence and extensive surveillance for anyone deemed to have had any links to the LTTE. It also identified the continued presence of “white van abductions”. This was a method by which gangs linked to the Sri Lankan government military abducted and silenced people suspected of opposing the dominant views of government.

The majority of white van abductions occur in Tamil-occupied areas of the north and east of Sri Lanka.

The issue of torture and other cruel, inhumane or degrading treatment of punishment is part of the legacy of the country’s armed conflict. It is one reason why Sri Lankan citizens continue to live without minimal guarantees of protection against the power of the state, in particular security forces.

They can’t go back

In 2014, the CEO of the Refugee Council of Australia, Paul Power, raised concerns about returning asylum seekers to Sri Lanka. He said the country had a “long history of political violence on a scale unimaginable to Australians”.

It is not surprising Sri Lankans fleeing persecution continue to come to Australia seven years after the war. Approximately 250,000 Tamil people fled during the final stages of the conflict in 2009.

The United Nations says around 40,000 mainly Tamil civilians were killed in this period. Those who survived became displaced in refugee camps under deteriorating humanitarian conditions. Many others risked their lives in boats, spending weeks in the ocean in search for a better life in countries such as Australia.

In its 2015 annual report, Human Rights Watch said:

The Sri Lankan government has made little progress in providing accountability for wartime abuses.

The report also identified that government obligations to address the human rights concerns of the Tamil minority population remain largely unfulfilled. And those who have returned faced indefinite imprisonment. Under these circumstances, the plight of asylum seekers returning to Sri Lanka appears to be anything but safe.

The Australian and Sri Lankan governments uphold that many asylum seekers from Sri Lanka are not fleeing persecution, and instead arrive as economic migrants.

This political rhetoric continues putting asylum seekers at risk and allows Australians to prioritise ignorance over confrontation.

Niro Kandasamy, PhD Candidate, School of Historical and Philosophical Studies, University of Melbourne

This article was originally published on The Conversation. Read the original article.

In Post-war Sri Lanka, Returning IDPs Face Fresh Challenges

Reporting from Keppapulavu, Mullaitivu

 

Shiran Illanperuma

Staff Writer-

-Fri 10th March 2017

Displaced since the last stages of Sri Lanka’s civil war, returnees from the northeastern village of Pilakudiyiruppu in Mullaitivu are busy building makeshift tents where their houses used to stand. Just a few metres away, behind barbed wire, Air Force cadets can be seen ‒ playing sports on parts of the village they still occupy.

Less than a week ago, following 30 days of relentless protest and an order from President and acting Defence Minister Maithripala Sirisena, the Sri Lanka Air Force released 54 acres of land it had been occupying, in the Keppapulavu Division of Mullaitivu, since the end of the civil war in 2009.

It was supposed to be a joyous occasion for a beleaguered community that has spent the post-war era toiling away at the Menik Farm IDP camp, and later, at an Army-built model village in nearby Seeniyamottai. However, resettlement has brought with it a host of new challenges to overcome.

Leader of a newly established community organisation, Saminathan, explains that the struggle is far from over. “Everything we remember is gone. Half the wells are destroyed. What is left, we don’t trust enough to drink from. There are no houses left standing, no toilets, and no government agencies to help us rebuild,” he says.

Uprooted

Mylvaganam (49) is a single father of two, whose family was displaced in 2008. A year later, during the last stages of the war, his wife went out to buy groceries one day and never returned.

Mylvaganam (49) is speechless, standing on the ruins of his childhood home. The structure has been demolished so thoroughly that even the foundation is irredeemable, the land surrounding is pockmarked ‒ a telltale sign of uprooted trees.

“After displacement, I was forced to work as a coolie to provide for my family, while my mother stayed at home to take care of my children. We were all excited to return to our ancestral land and cultivate together again, but my mother couldn’t stop crying when she saw our house destroyed and our trees gone,” says Mylvaganam.

“I had planted 52 coconut trees on my land before being displaced. The income from their harvest helped sustain my family, but now there are only 15 trees left. I think the military has uprooted them, but I can’t understand why,” he adds.

Unlike the quarter acre of land given to the displaced in Seeniyamottai, the lands in Pilakudiyiruppu are noted for both their fertility and proximity to the sea ‒ allowing for a self-sufficient, cyclical lifestyle of farming and fishing. But dreams of cultivation and seafaring will need to be put on hold.

Says Saminathan, “There is only debris and jungle where our houses, pre-schools, and temples used to be. With many of our trees gone and our wells destroyed, cultivating will take time. We cannot begin fishing either, as most of our equipment was lost during the war. For now, we must focus on rebuilding.”

Grounded

Jeyachithra (37), shares a tent with her husband, three young children, and her sister’s family. She says, “Whatever difficulties we face, we know this is our home. We know the worth of this land and how to work it.”

Sri Lanka Red Cross (SLRC) is one of the few aid organisations on the ground in Pilakudiyiruppu, working with the local authorities to provide resettled families with basic amenities like kitchen utensils, mosquito nets, mattresses, and sheets of tarpaulin.

SLRC Senior Manager of Communication and Partnerships, Mahieash Johnney, says that the need of the hour is houses, and support to resume traditional livelihoods. But Johnney concedes that aid agencies today face a shortage of funding and resources.

“When the war ended, international donors made so many promises, but as a humanitarian organisation, we see that the donor-base has completely dried up. We need help to bring these people up to a dignified, human standard of living. They are literally starting from zero,” he explains.

In light of the complete lack of facilities in Pilakudiyiruppu, Mullaitivu Government Agent R. Ketheeswaran says that families can continue to stay in Seeniyamottai until the Resettlement Ministry is able to provide housing assistance through a grant of Rs. 800,000 per family.

“The Government will provide houses but the villagers have been informed that they will have to return their land in Seeniyamottai afterwards. The state cannot afford to give one family two plots of land so we have the authority to revoke older permits,” says Ketheeswaran.

When Roar previously visited the protest conducted by families from Pilakudiyiruppu, one of the leaders, and President of a local Women’s Rural Development Society, Chandraleela, argued that villagers should be allowed to retain their lands in Seeniyamottai.

She said, “The military has been occupying our homes for over eight years. As reparation, the Government should let people keep the lands in Seeniyamottai. If not, they should cough up eight years’ worth of rent.”

Militarised

A stone sign outside the only structure left standing in Pilakudiyiruppu. The paint has been scraped away but the text reading, “Officers’ Holiday Home,” is still legible.

As the SLRC hands out the little aid it can, and returnees focus on rebuilding their homes, the military presence in Pilakudiyiruppu is as evident as ever. According to Saminathan, only 54 out of 80 families had their lands returned. Adjacent to these released lands, military officers are still within the line of sight of returning civilians.

“Many people lost everything during displacement, including their permits and deeds. Around 30 families are now staying here with us, sharing tents with their friends and family. We try to support each other however we can,” says Saminathan.

“The Air Force says it will eventually release the rest of the lands but we don’t know how long that will be; it took us eight years to get this much. We feel uneasy being surrounded by barbed wire and having soldiers so close. The women are as insecure here as they were in Seeniyamottai,” he adds.

Meanwhile, in the neighbouring village of Keppapulavu, Chandraleela is now leading a protest outside the camp of the 54th Division of the Army. Unlike in Pilakudiyiruppu, protesters say that the structures in Keppapulavu are still intact, having been renovated and repurposed for military use.

Despite offering leadership for Pilakudiyiruppu’s displaced families, Chandraleela’s own ancestral land is in Keppapulavu. She claims that her family home is currently being occupied by an Army Brigadier from the 59th Division.

“We have seen that we only get what we want when we take to the streets,” says Chandraleela. “Rain or shine, I will stay here with my people ‒ until we get all of our lands back.”

All images courtesy writer.

Sri Lankan refugees in dilemma over return

Representative image

Expose` : Good governance commander in chief completes two years but MR ‘s control still within army !

 Mar 10, 2017

TRICHY: Nearly three decades after taking shelter in India, a majority of Sri Lankan Tamil refugees appear to be in two minds in going back to their country despite normalcy returning to the once war-torn island nation. Uncertainty over a peaceful future back home as well as the consequences of returning to India again are the major deterrents for them.

Wounded physically and mentally in the ethnic war in 1980s, Sri Lankan Tamils had found Tamil Nadu to be a safe haven to survive. With the war between the Sinhalese and the LTTE coming to an end a few years ago, the idea of returning to their homeland had blossomed in the minds of many of the refugees in the 112 camps across the state.

"As citizens of Sri Lanka, we all long to go back to our country and many of our people are gradually stepping into our home towns. Those who have been repatriated so far are making efforts to rebuild their lives on their . The number of such repatriations may increase if normalcy and freedom continue to exist there in the real sense," said a 65-year-old man in one of the two camps in Trichy.

In all, 60 refugees had returned from two camps in Kottapattu and Vazhavandhankottai in Trichy since April last year. A similar repatriation has been happening in other camps in the state as well. United Nations High Commission for Refugees (UNHCR) in Chennai had come forward to help them by providing free flight tickets among other things. The agency had also been helping them clear all procedures like securing a one-way passport and exit pass.

Twenty refugees from Kottapattu camp had been repatriated with the help of UNHCR while two refugees moved back on their own. Similarly, 21 refugees left with support from UNHCR and 17 by themselves from Vazhavandhankottai camp. Last month, two refugees from Kottapattu camp were repatriated. At present, 1,389 refugees including 701 males and 688 females are residing in Kottapattu camp while the other camp has 1,420 refugees including 725 males and 695 females. To return or not is the dilemma haunting these people as they stay put in the camps.

Tamil Nadu government has been taking care of the refugees for the last three decades by providing shelter on a protected campus, cash dole and free rice. A 37-year-old man from Vavunia told TOI that he is content with what he has been getting from the government under the refugee category. "We had migrated to Mandapam camp in Rameswaram when I was five years old and then shifted to Trichy camp in 1996. Since then we have been residing here because of the cash dole and other benefits from the government. Even if we return to our home land, we are not sure if we will be able to lead a normal life," he said.

The monthly cash dole includes Rs 1,000 for the head of the family, Rs 750 for those aged above 12 years and Rs 400 for children below 12 years. They also get 20 kg of free rice per family and have to pay only 57 paise for every additional kilogram.

"Sri Lankan refugees are happily leading their lives in the camps with the help of the state government. Now, they want to move back home. Very few of them have been repatriated while the rest are hesitating to go there," regional special deputy collector S Natarasan told TOI.

Though repatriation may be an easy task for them because of the help of NGOs, the refugees are very careful in moving out of India as they cannot be accepted as refugees again if they prefer to return here in case of an unfavourable situation in Sri Lanka. An NGO called Child Fund India recently set up a help centre in Kottapattu camp to provide a clear picture of the circumstances in Sri Lanka to those who wanted to move back home. The refugees have been relying on these inputs to decide about their future plan. " I have no idea if I can get a normal life there. I have a lot of queries to be clarified before returning.

If I am not satisfied, I will not go back," said a 25-year-old woman.

SRI LANKA: LAWYERS ACCESS TO DETAINEES RESTRICTED BY GAZETTED AMENDMENT

Image: Police torture is endemic in Sri Lanka.

10/03/2017

The proposed amendments to  the Code of Criminal Procedure, which were gazetted on 6th March,  if enacted, allow for a situation that  the Officer in Charge of a Police Station can deny lawyers from accessing detainees and even police stations if such access would “impede ongoing investigations” says Centre for Policy Alternatives. (CPA).

Issuing a statement CPA says it is deeply concerned by the Bill titled Amendment to the Code of Criminal Procedure (Special Provisions) Act No. 2 of 2013 – (rights of detainees – access to legal counsel) which was approved by Cabinet of Ministers on the 21st February 2017 and gazetted on the 6th March 2017.

The statement further says:

The Bill is meant as an improvement on a previous Bill to amend the Code of Criminal Procedure, which the government did not proceed with due to concerns raised by several stakeholders including CPA. CPA notes that the present Bill seeks to provide statutory recognition to some of the existing constitutional and administrative safeguards for detainees in relation to access to lawyers, which are needed. However, we are alarmed at the proposed clauses 6A(2) and 6A(6), which are seriously flawed. These provisions, if enacted, allow for a situation were the Officer in Charge of a Police Station can deny lawyers from accessing detainees and even police stations if such access would “impede ongoing investigations”.

In a context where there is a well-documented history of custodial torture and abuse of power by the Police, providing such broad powers to an Officer in Charge is deeply troubling and unacceptable. Furthermore, these over-broad clauses would render meaningless the other rights enumerated in the Bill. As such the Bill would curtail existing constitutional and administrative protections for detainees, and like its previous avatar, facilitate the violation of rights including the commission of custodial torture. It would seem therefore that the aforementioned clauses of the proposed Bill are inconsistent with the government’s stated commitment to a zero-tolerance policy towards torture.

CPA notes that while these provisions are proposed to operate only temporarily, legislation such as the notorious Prevention of Terrorism Act (PTA) were also initially enacted as temporary provisions but became permanent over time. The government must ensure that any proposals at legislative reform meet international standards in protecting the human rights of all citizens, and not become a tool of impeding such rights. In these circumstances, CPA calls on the government to immediately remove Clause 6A(2) and 6A(6) of the Bill.

UPFA M.P. Bandula the record breaking liar admits he utters falsehoods, before Presidential Commission !

(Lanka-e-News -10.March.2017, 11.30PM)  Bandula Gunawardena the UPFA M.P.who  said a family can subsist on a monthly  income of just Rs. 2500.00 in Sri Lanka ,  while himself enjoying the best of luxuries , perks and privileges selfishly and shamelessly , and who entered  parliament making false promises of providing the  best of perks and privileges to the people who elected him to power,  after all admitted before two judges of the supreme court on the 9 th that he tells  lies when addressing  media briefings. 

The hypocritical mendacious M.P whose name  deserved a place in the Guinness book of records for profusely lying  admitted his mendacious  nature before the presidential commission in connection with the bond scam investigation.

Bandula the record breaking liar who said at a recent media briefing that he has sent a report to the presidential commission regarding the alleged  bond scam admitted  that he told a lie ,before the presidential commission inquiring into the bond scam ,  and the grounds cited by him at the media briefing  were false . 

The two judges of the SC and  retired deputy Auditor General  who are functioning as the Commissioners of the Presidential Commission thereupon severely reprimanded and furiously warned the shameless mendacious M.P .They also warned Bandula Gunawardena against telling lies and citing bogus reasons  during media briefings to mislead the people . 

The outrageous   side to  this interesting court scene was , Namal Rajapakse (against whom too are cases pending in courts based on criminal charges of fraud and corruption) , the son of  infamous Machiavellian and mendacious  ex president of the country appearing for the record breaking liar of an M.P., as his lawyer . Perhaps , like setting a thief to catch a thief , Bandula has chosen the right lawyer ,synthetic though to rescue him. Amidst all his profuse lying , Bandula at least had that iota of  intelligence to understand  he must retain a bigger liar than he to defend him .

The judges having understood Bandula is a confirmed  liar , when  Bandula admitted his dangerous weakness, recorded a statement of his. 

In response to a request made by Bandula to the Commission to give him an opportunity to reveal what he knows about the bond scam , the Commission granted him the request on the 9 th. 

Lawyer Dappula De Livera the additional solicitor General who appeared on behalf of the commission led Bandula’s evidence .

Members comprising the Commission were : SC judges K.T. Chitrasiri , Prasanna S. Jayawardena P.C.  and retired Deputy auditor General  K. Velupillai . 

---------------------------
by     (2017-03-10 20:15:56)

MMDA: Personal Narratives – 6

MAATRAM on 03/09/2017

This is the sixth in a series of videos conducted by sister publication Maatram, highlighting the difficulties faced by women under the Muslim Marriage and Divorce Act (MMDA).

Article 16 of the constitution states that existing written and unwritten laws, such as the MMDA, will continue in force even over constitutional law. There is currently a campaign for the reform of personal laws, with some calling for the repeal of Article 16 altogether.

Full English transcript of the interview below.

“I have five children – four daughters and one son. My husband left me when I was still pregnant with my youngest. Now, the youngest is six years old.

I can only feed my children once a day. I take on day labour, and only cook for them once I come home. They only eat at night. Rain or shine, I have to work, or else the children will have to go hungry. Four of my children are going to school now. For one day, I only earn about Rs, 500 -600. What can I do with that money? My elderly father and mother also live with me. 

The Quazi court ordered my husband to give Rs. 15,000 in maintenance payments for my five children. He only gives me between Rs. 7000 and Rs. 10,000 – he won’t give me more than that. Sometimes he says he is not well and doesn’t give me the full amount. He still owes me one and a half year’s worth of payments.

I asked the Quazi court judge to order him to give me the full amount. The Quazi court judge said, “He is giving you Rs. 10,000 at least. I can’t ask him to give more.” How can we survive on just Rs. 10,000 with five children?

The court case is ongoing in my husband’s hometown, so I have to go to Jaffna for the hearings. I have to leave my children, spend Rs. 2000 and go to Jaffna. Since my youngest child doesn’t need to pay for a ticket, I take him for support. When we go there, my husband refuses to give the money. So after spending money and going there, I have to return with nothing. I am really tired of going to Jaffna and back once a month. If they change the location of the hearings, it would be a big help for me.”

For the earlier videos in this series, click here, here, here, here and here. 

The tragi-comedy in Geneva and the Indo-Tamil problem

Eleanor Roosevelt

By Izeth Hussain-March 10, 2017, 9:24 pm 

What is the State? The writer is not asking for a definition of the State but for information on how people view the State. For many the State is potentially or actually the enemy of the people. Also for many the State is potentially or actually the friend of the people. Both views are of course correct to varying degrees: some States are enemies of the people while others are people-friendly. What are human rights? Again what is sought is not a definition but information on how people view human rights. For many human rights are what the people have for the most part to extort from unwilling States. Human rights can be secured without much difficulty from people-friendly States but they are difficult or impossible to extort from States that are enemies of the people.

The ambiguous relationship between the State and human rights outlined in the preceding paragraph has to be grasped for us to be able to understand the tragi-comedy that is presently being enacted at the UN Human Rights Council in Geneva. We must also grasp another factor: the ever-growing spread and power of the human rights movement after 1945. That has frightening implications for devotees of the State because it entails a shift of sovereignty from the State – one of the givens in international relations since the 1648 Treaty of Westphalia - to the people. It is a shift that is fully in accord with the revolutionary democratic ideology of both the American and French Revolutions of the eighteenth century. All the same, it had to be expected that the holders of State power in the US, just as much as the holders of State power elsewhere, would not want the human rights movement to go too far. Therefore Eleanor Roosevelt and others who led the American delegations in formulating the UN Declaration and Covenants on Human Rights were resolved on giving human rights their due place but also they wanted to stop it from going too far: human rights yes, but not empowering the people to such an extent that they can ignore the diktats of the State.

Consequently there are two dimensions to the drama being enacted at the UNHRC. One is the dimension of tragedy: horrors have been perpetrated on a mass scale against minorities as in Sri Lanka as well as against members of the majority – as in the case of the mass butchery of JVP youths in Sri Lanka. The view has taken hold in the West after 1945 that a better world and a stable world order will not be possible without a minimum observance of human rights. There is therefore an admirable resolve in the West to address and minimize tragedy in the world resulting from the violation of human rights. But at that point the dimension of the comic comes in. The West, at the UN and elsewhere, has steadfastly refused to take really effective action against the miscreants, the States, who are responsible for mass violations of human rights. Right from the inception of action on the UN Declaration and Covenants on human rights the emphasis has been on naming and shaming the miscreants into better behavior, not on the punitive action that can be really effective in securing that end. Most often the miscreants get away scot free. Furthermore there is the problem of shocking double standards: no action against the worst miscreant of all, the US which has the world record in killing innocents, and we find that its buddy Saudi Arabia struts about at the UNHRC. The factor of the comic in the proceedings of the UNHRC cannot be denied. But some would say that tragi-comedy is too refined a term because what is going on there is really farce, utter farce. The writer suspects nevertheless that the underlying problem about taking really effective action on human rights is that that could strengthen the sovereignty of the people at the expense of the sovereignty of the State.

Our Tamils will of course be deeply dismayed by proceedings at the UNHRC: they have undergone tragedy but that is being given comic treatment at Geneva. The expectation is that the Sri Lankan Government will be given a reprieve of two years after which there can be further reprieves, which means that nothing really effective will be done at Geneva towards the redressing of Tamil grievances, all because the Government has managed to bamboozle the West that it is really in earnest about solving the Tamil ethnic problem. That will be the typical Tamil perspective on the proceedings in Geneva. Therefore the Tamils will expect the Government to go into hibernation once again over the Tamil ethnic problem. But we cannot be sure of that outcome.

In the preceding account of the essentials of what is going on at the UNHRC an important factor has been left out: it is the factor of power in international relations. The Rajapakse Government fell afoul of India and a powerful bloc of countries in the West partly because it was seen as veering towards China to an unacceptable degree and partly because it was seen as utterly cynical about working towards a political solution of the ethnic problem. That led to Sri Lankan becoming embroiled in a peculiar style of confrontational diplomacy in Geneva. The present Government has reversed that trend by co-sponsoring the 2015 UNHRC Resolution on Sri Lanka. That can be seen as an act of abject surrender to powers that have been inimical to Sri Lanka or as an act of supreme pragmatism that is paying rich dividends: co-operative diplomacy has replaced the confrontational one and there are no threats of sanctions. But the present trend could be reversed if the factor of Chinese power in South Asia leads to serious misunderstandings with India and the West – a possibility that prudence dictates we should never rule out. In that event the UNHRC could again become the site of action against the Sri Lankan Government.

What should be done? The first principle, from which all the rest follows, is that the Government must show that it is really in earnest about solving the ethnic problem and giving a fair deal to the Tamils. It is only then that India and the rest of the international community can be expected to give due weight to the problems that the Government has to face in dealing with the ethnic problem. There must be an international recognition that there are matters on which the Government can be expected to deliver and that there are other matters on which no Government in Colombo can ever be expected to deliver. That applies to 13 A. We and the rest of the international community have been fixated on the notion that a solution will be possible only through devolution and consequently 13 A has come to be seen as something sacrosanct. The problem is that the Tamils want 13 A in full and more than that while the Government cannot be expected to deliver on anything more than a modified version of 13 A. But the Government can deliver on a solution through a fully functioning democracy. Why not focus on that solution while abandoning devolution altogether?

The writer has come to believe that what Sri Lanka has on its hands is not a purely indigenous Tamil ethnic problem but an Indo-Tamil problem. If not for the factors of Tamil Nadu and Delhi there will be no Tamil ethnic problem in Sri Lanka today meriting international attention. A further point to be born in mind is that if not for Indian intervention in 1987 the Vaddamarachi operation would have led to a military victory followed by a political solution long ago. The Indian intervention had no imperialist intent behind it but all the same it led to disaster for Sri Lanka. So, it is arguable that India has a very special moral obligation to help us towards a solution. Why not try out the model that helps India deal satisfactorily with its Indian Muslim minority: a fully functioning democracy without any devolution at all?

izethhussain@gmail.com

Ex-Attorney General In Hot Water For Favouring Ravi Karunanayake In Money Laundering Case

March 10, 2017

Former Attorney General Yuvanjana Wijayatilake has been accused of abusing his office and for unethically granting favours to Finance Minister Ravi Karunanayake.

Ravi Karunanayake

In a letter addressed to the Chairman of the Commission to Investigate Allegations of Bribery and Corruption (CIABOC) yesterday, Nagananda Kodituwakku, an Attorney-at-Law and Public Interest Litigation Activist claimed that Wijayatilake had abused his office by offering favours to Karunanayake, which according to Kodituwakku falls within the offence of corruption as defined in the Section 70 of the Bribery Act.

In an affidavit filed along with the letter, Kodituwakku said that he had ‘credible evidence’ against the ex-Attorney General in favouring Karunanayake, in the US $ 3 million money laundering case connected to Raj Rajaratnam, the founder of the Galleon Group.

Kodituwakku claimed that ‘apparently’ due to political pressure Wijayatilake, absolutely failed to perform the public office he held as required by law, whereas in a similar case where the accused Basil Rajapaksa, a former Minister in the Rajapaksa administration, was served with a faulty indictment, the Attorney General carried out his duties as required by law by serving an indictment afresh on the accused Basil Rajapaksa.

The activist pointed out that according to law and tradition the office of the Attorney General in the Republic of Sri Lanka, holds the office endowed with powers, onerous duties and special rights in regard to matters involving the exercise of sovereignty of the people which include the Executive, Legislative and Judicial power. And the Attorney General represents and acts for the people of Sri Lanka and not for any organ of the Republic of Sri Lanka, that exercise undeniable sovereign rights of the people purely on trust.

“And it has been observed by the concerned citizens that the abuse of office by the persons who held the office of the Attorney General has already caused tremendous damage to the credibility in the office, resulting in an erosion of the people’s confidence in the office which had been openly abused to please the Executive, completely disregarding the constitutional duty vested in the person who holds the office who is under duty to perform it with due respect and regard to the sovereignty vested only in the people and those abuses have clearly resulted in the deterioration of the public trust placed in the judiciary,” he said.

Therefore, with a view to restore the public trust and confidence in the office of the Attorney General, without which the norm of representative democracy is unworkable, Kodituwakku requested the Commission to initiate a credible and independent investigation into this complaint in terms of Section 4 of the Act No 19 of 1994.

The four page affidavit by Kodituwakku submitted to the CIABOC chairman is below;

Affidavit

I, Nagananda Kodituwakku, a citizen of Sri Lanka and the UK, a public interest litigation activist, an Attorney at Law (Sri Lanka) and a Solicitor (UK), being Buddhist, currently residing at 99, Subadrarama Road, Nugegoda, do hereby solemnly and truly declare and affirm as follows:-

Read More

Govt. exposed over Sil clothing case!

Mar 10, 2017

The media has reported that the charges of misuse of Rs. 600 million of TRC money during the last presidential election leveled against former secretary to the president Lalith Weeratunga and ex-TRC director general Anusha Pelpita under the Public Property Act will be amended to file criminal misuse charges as per provisions in the penal code.

The charges are to be amended at the request of Kanchana Ratwatte and Kalinga Indatissa, who appear for the respondents.

If they are accused of criminal misuse under the penal code, it should be proven that they have received financial gains from the money in question. It is clear that none of the two have gained anything financially from the distribution of Sil material at the TRC’s expense in order to gain votes for Mahinda Rajapaksa. Therefore, what will happen at the next hearing will be that the two accused will be acquitted.

That means that the two rascals will go scot free without the law finding anyone responsible for their having used such a massive sum of state money for the political gain of the ex-president. The worst result from that will be that this will be a very bad precedence to any of the cases already filed or to be filed under the public property act and to be heard by the high court. The loopholes of the law that will open up for Lalith and Anusha will next open up for Basil and Namal. What will happen then is that due to the games being played by the government, Basil and Namal will be cleared of the charges and become national heroes.

There is a separate act by the name public property act in order to prevent state authorities from misusing public money and to mete out punishment for any misuse. But, if the legal process into any misuse of public money spent for political gains can be tampered with, such a country will eventually have its laws ridiculed before the eyes of its people and will pave the way for the breeding of leeches to suck the lifeblood out of public property. The government that brags about its good governance should explain as to why it takes up concerns of public property this lightly.