Antibiotic 'link to bowel cancer precursor'

GARO/PHANIE/SCIENCE PHOTO LIBRARY

MEHAU KULYK/SCIENCE PHOTO LIBRARY

5 April 2017

People who take antibiotics for a long time are more likely to develop growths on the bowel which can be a precursor to cancer, a study suggests.

Researchers say this adds to emerging evidence that the diversity of bugs in the gut could have role in the development of tumours.

Their paper appears in the journal Gut.

But experts warn that the early results need further investigation and say people should not stop taking antibiotics.

'Hostile bugs'

Bowel polyps - small growths on the lining of bowel - are common, affecting 15%-20% of the UK population.

In most cases, they do not cause any symptoms and do not become cancerous but some go on to develop into cancers if left untreated.

In this study, researchers looked at data from 16,600 nurses who were taking part in a long-term US trial called the Nurses' Health Study.

They found that nurses who had taken antibiotics for two months or more, between the ages of 20 and 39, were more likely to be diagnosed with particular types of bowel polyps - known as adenomas - in later life, compared wtih people who had not taken long-term antibiotics in their 20s and 30s.

And women who had taken antibiotics for two months or more in their 40s and 50s were even more likely to be diagnosed with an adenoma decades later.

But the study does not look at how many polyps went on to become cancerous.

The authors say their research cannot prove that antibiotics lead to the development of cancer and acknowledge that the bacteria which the drugs are deployed to treat might also play an important role.

But they say there is a "plausible biological explanation" for the patterns seen.

Writing in the journal they said: "Antibiotics fundamentally alter the gut microbiome, by curbing the diversity and number of bacteria, and reducing the resistance to hostile bugs."

"This might all have a crucial role in the development of bowel cancer, added to which the bugs that require antibiotics may induce inflammation, which is a known risk for the development of bowel cancer."

They added: "The findings if confirmed by other studies, suggest the potential need to limit the use of antibiotics and sources of inflammation that may drive tumour formation."

'Slight and variable'

Meanwhile, Dr Sheena Cruickshank, am immunology expert at the University of Manchester, said anything that disturbs our gut bacteria, such as changes in diet, inflammation or antibiotic use, could potentially have an impact on our health.

But she said it was difficult to tease out whether other factors - like diet - could be more deeply involved in the current study.

She added: "This study's findings imply that any risk is very slight and also quite variable.

"Whilst the data adds to our growing knowledge of the importance of the gut bacteria to our health, I would be concerned about advising people to avoid using antibiotics.

"Antibiotics are crucial medicines for treating bacterial infections and, if prescribed and used appropriately, can be life-saving."

What increases the chance of getting bowel cancer?

A diet high in red or processed meats and low in fibre can increase the risk, according to NHS Choices.

NHS experts also say bowel cancer is more common in people who are overweight or obese and people who are inactive.

Drinking a lot of alcohol and smoking also increase the chance of getting cancer of the bowel.

And people who have bowel cancer in the family can also be at higher risk.

What about people taking long-term antibiotics?

Dr Jasmine Just, health information officer at the charity Cancer Research UK told the BBC: "This research is at a very early stage so it is too early to draw definitive conclusions.

"People who are prescribed antibiotics by medical professionals should continue taking them and discuss any concerns with their doctor."

Meanwhile Dr Cruickshank added that a prescribed course of antibiotics - which can be life-saving in some circumstances - should not be stopped without expert guidance.

How great are the risks?

Experts say it is difficult to be sure of exact risks for individuals from this paper. That's because the paper looks at precursors of cancer, not cancer itself.

The risk of bowel cancer can depend on many things- a family history of bowel cancer, diet, alcohol and smoking all play a part.

Interpreting the results, Dr Cruickshank describes any potential increased risk is "very slight and very variable."

Meanwhile Dr Just, said: "It is not possible to be sure of cause and effect from this paper. We are still one step away from being able to suggest either way whether there is an increased risk.

"But this is very interesting research that builds on other studies looking at how the microbes in the bowel affect our health."

Sri Lanka - Victims of disappearance cannot wait any longer for justice

Sri Lanka will not break with its violent past until it reckons with the cruel history of enforced disappearance and delivers justice to as many as 100,000 families who have spent years waiting for it, Amnesty International said today in a new report, revealing the enduring scars of a conflict that has been forgotten by the world.

3 April 2017

Amnesty International’s report, “Only Justice can heal our wounds”, will be launched by the organization’s Secretary General Salil Shetty at a meeting with families of the disappeared in the northern Sri Lankan town of Mannar.

The report tells the story of relatives, many of them women, who have spent years searching for truth and justice. Obstructed at every turn, they have been misled about the whereabouts or fate of their disappeared relatives, subjected to threats, smears and intimidation, and suffered the indignity of delayed trials and a stalled truth and justice processes.

Until justice is delivered to these victims, the country cannot begin to heal, let alone move towards a more promising future

Amnesty International's Secretary General, Salil Shetty

SHARE THIS

“There is no community in Sri Lanka that remains untouched by the trauma of enforced disappearance. Most people in the country suffer the absence of a loved one or know someone who does. They have waited years, and in some cases, decades, to learn of the fate of their relatives. Until justice is delivered to these victims, the country cannot begin to heal, let alone move towards a more promising future,” said Salil Shetty, Amnesty International’s Secretary General.

Despite international commitments to end impunity for enforced disappearance, which may amount to crimes against humanity where they have been widespread and systematic, the authorities have failed to investigate these cases, identify the whereabouts or fate of the victim, or prosecute those suspected of the crimes.

A major driver of enforced disappearances has been like Sri Lanka’s notorious Prevention of Terrorism Act (PTA). Enabling incommunicado and secret detention, the PTA places people outside the law and leaves them vulnerable to human rights violations including torture and enforced disappearances.

“Sri Lanka needs to put the victims at the heart of any reconciliation process. The authorities must hear their demands and implement them. The current government has taken encouraging steps to acknowledge the need to end impunity, but it cannot leave the victims waiting any longer. They have waited too long already. If Sri Lanka wants to successfully pull away from its violent past, it must address victims’ demands for justice, truth, reparation and guarantees of non-recurrence,” said Salil Shetty.

An relentless search for justice

One of the cases detailed in the report is of Sandya Eknaligoda, whose husband, Prageeth, left his on 24 January 2010 and never returned. Prageeth Eknaligoda was a political cartoonist, known for his efforts to expose corruption and human rights abuses by the government then in power.

There is no community in Sri Lanka that remains untouched by the trauma of enforced disappearance. Most people in the country suffer the absence of a loved one or know someone who does. They have waited years, and in some cases, decades, to learn of the fate of their relatives

Amnesty International's Secretary General, Salil Shetty

SHARE THIS

Sandya Eknaligoda’s perseverance has led to some evidence being uncovered which indicates that military intelligence personnel may have been involved in her husband’s disappearance. Since she filed a complaint, she has been to court at least 90 times. Each time she appears, she faces the prospect of harassment. She told Amnesty International that last year, a prominent member of the Buddhist national Bodhu Bala Sena and other monks stormed the court at Homagama and threatened her. The same group has smeared her as a supporter of the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE) in posters.

In 2011, the former attorney general told the UN Committee Against Torture that her husband had not been abducted but had fled the country. When confronted about the claim in court, the former attorney general said that his memory had failed him, forgetting where the claim came from.

Sandya has pressed on with her campaign, writing repeatedly to Sri Lankan leaders, handing out appeals in front of Parliament, organizing vigils, and emboldening other wives of the disappeared to raise their voices and join her demand for justice. Taking her case to the UN Human Rights Council, she has forced slow progress. In 2015, an investigation revealed that Prageeth had been held at army camps. But the process has stalled since then.

A cruel history

Since the 1980s, Amnesty International estimates there have been at least 60,000 and as many as 100,000 cases of enforced disappearance in Sri Lanka. The victims include Sinhalese young people who were killed or forcibly disappeared by government death squads on suspicion of leftists links in 1989 and 1990. They include Tamils suspected of links to the LTTE, disappeared by police, military and paramilitary operatives during the conflict from 1983 to 2009. And they include human rights defenders, aid workers, journalists, government critics, and prominent community leaders.

In June 2016, former President Chandrika Bandranaike Kumaratunga, who was in office from 1994 to 2005, acknowledged receiving at least 65,000 complaints of disappearance. The true figure could be as high as 100,000 people, Amnesty International estimates, as communities who have lived and continue to live under a pall of fear and without confidence in the authorities have not reported other cases.

Under international law, an enforced disappearance is where a person is arrested, detained, abducted or otherwise deprived of their liberty by agents of the state, or by persons or groups of persons acting with the authorization, support, or acquiescence of the state, followed by a refusal to acknowledge the deprivation of liberty or by concealment of the fate or whereabouts of the disappeared person, which places them outside the protection of the law. In Sri Lanka, many “abductions” or “disappearances” have also been carried out by non-state actors, including armed groups.

In Sri Lanka, enforced disappearance have varied in time, scale and intensity at various points in the conflict. Having ratified the Convention, Sri Lanka has an obligation to investigate all allegations of disappearance and, where sufficient evidence exists, to prosecute those suspected of the crimes at all levels in proceedings which should be fair and without recourse to the death penalty. The government must ensure that victims and their families are told the truth and that they are provided with full and effective reparation to address the harm they have suffered.

A way forward: truth, justice, reparation and non-recurrence

In October 2015, the Sri Lankan government committed to develop mechanisms and institute other reforms aimed at delivering truth, justice, reparation and ensuring non-recurrence for past human rights violations and abuses. In public communications, the government of Sri Lanka refers to the overall process as “reconciliation.”

If Sri Lanka wants to successfully pull away from its violent past, it must address victims’ demands for justice, truth, reparation and guarantees of non-recurrence

Amnesty International's Secretary General, Salil Shetty

The determined activism of families of the disappeared and widespread public familiarity with the issue has pushed the government to address disappearances first, the process has been stalled. Last year, the Sri Lankan Parliament ratified the International Convention for the Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearance. But a bill to implement the Convention by criminalising enforced disappearance in the Sri Lankan Penal Code has yet to be debated.

Also in 2016, Parliament passed a bill to establish the “Office of Missing Persons”. While a laudable step, the government failed to consult with victims and civil society or address their concerns about the bill, including ambiguous provisions on whether evidence of responsibility for disappearance gathered by the Office would be submitted to prosecuting authorities, undermining public confidence in the initiative. The President has yet to sign the bill into law.

Where the government has reached out to victims, it has ignored what they have to say. Public consultations on the design of justice, truth and reparation mechanisms attracted more than 7,000 submissions, including many from families of the disappeared. But officials have shown little interest in the findings and even denigrated the Task Force that organized it.

To move forward, the Sri Lankan government should:

- Enact legislation making disappearance a crime under national law in accordance with the Convention for the Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearance.

- Amend and enact the Office on Missing Persons Act to ensure that the Office is established effectively without further delay to investigate all allegations of disappearance; ensuring its effectiveness by seeing that it is fairly, transparently and adequately staffed and resourced; ensure that it submits evidence of responsibility for disappearances to prosecuting authorities;

- Where sufficient admissible evidence exists, prosecute those responsible for disappearances promptly before civilian courts in fair trials without recourse to the death penalty;

- Preclude the application of amnesties, immunities and other measures of impunity to persons suspected of committing crimes under international law;

- Formally acknowledge and prioritize the findings and recommendations of the Consultation Task Force;

- Ensure that victims, including families of the disappeared, are provided with full and effective reparation to address the harm they have suffered, including restitution, compensation, rehabilitation and satisfaction;

- Repeal the Prevention of Terrorism Act (PTA) and end its use immediately; abolish Sri Lanka’s system of administrative detention and ensure that any future legislation meant to replace the PTA meets international standards;

- Release all individuals held under the PTA or other forms of arbitrary or secret detention unless they are charged with recognizable criminal offences and remanded in custody by an independent, regularly constituted court.

Recalling war trauma

Dusty lanes and fences covered with fertilizer bags at houses in line at Gummidipoondi camp. 

2017-04-04

In June 1990, eleven boats carrying around 500 Sri Lankan Tamils arrived in Danushkodi, Tamil Nadu, India. Four pregnant women and dozens of kids who were tethered to their mothers for safety were among those in the boats. Most were barefoot. They had no life jackets. With only the clothes they were wearing, they were stranded at sea with no food, water or hopes for the future. They were forced to experience unbelievable hardships as they fled their homeland due to the armed conflict between Sri Lankan forces and the LTTE (Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam). Indian fishermen charged Rs.5,000 from each Sri Lankan for the boat service. The desperate victims sold all their possessions to make the payments.   

Recalling war trauma.docx by Thavam Ratna on Scribd

JOINT DECISIONMAKING TO OVERCOME SENSE OF DRIFT THAT HARMS COUNTRY’S PROSPECTS--Jehan Perera

Jehan Perera-Monday, 03 April 2017

In the public perception there is a sense of drift in the constructive activities of the government on all fronts. President Maithripala Sirisena has been attempting to overcome this sense of drift by political means. He has been having public programmes that enhance his own visibility. An example would be the SLFP Youth Convention where he expressed his intentions of holding the much delayed local government elections this year. He also gave leadership to a public exhibition of locally manufactured products at the BMICH which attracted large crowds who were able to make purchases at relatively low rates. However, his oft repeated pledge to have a cabinet reshuffle does not appear to be reaching fruition.

One of the most important promises of the President during his election campaign was to eliminate corruption from the government. But now there is a widespread public perception that corruption is no longer on the decline as it was during the first several months of the new government, but is now rising with a vengeance with little or nothing being done to put a stop to it. The public expectation was that a cabinet reshuffle would have been part of an effort to reverse this negative trend. However, the indications are that there will not cabinet reshuffle of any significance in the immediate future. Those who have been subject of political and ethical controversy are also those who played an indispensable role in bringing the government to power.

If it is to happen at all the best time for a cabinet reshuffle would be with the signing of the new Memorandum of Understanding between the two main parties to the National Unity Government in August. The MOU between the UNP and SLFP is only for two years. There is little reason to doubt that the partnership between the two parties will continue. With the Joint Opposition led by former President Mahinda Rajapaksa continuing to hold together, and the popularity of the former president remaining high, the government has no option but to continue to work together as a national unity government to ensure political stability. The signing of the new MOU would be an occasion for the two parties to the alliance to come to an improved working arrangement.

ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT

Taking the country to a new level requires that decisions be taken with regard to economic development on the one hand, and inter-ethnic reconciliation on the other. On both of these fronts there has been little or no progress. The basic direction has been set but there is no speedy movement forward. There are internal doubts and divisions between the two coalition partners. It might seem that if one party were to take over the reins of government it can decide by itself. The problem is that in both areas of economic development and reconciliation there is controversy about what to do that could sink a single party that seeks to implement progressive policies on its own. There is a need for the two parties to come to a consensus on the way forward and to move forward to a new level of engagement with the two economic powerhouses of Asia, China and India.

Government members have expressed their disappointment that the economic assistance anticipated from Western countries has not materialized. At the beginning of their tenure the new government even went to the extent of stopping all Chinese funded economic projects on the grounds that they were expensive and been negotiated with the former government in a non-transparent manner which gave rise to allegations of corrupt practices. In taking this decisive action the government may have been anticipating compensatory, and cheaper, inflows of resources from Western countries. The memory of how the UK government once funded the lead development project of the 1980s, the Mahaweli river diversion scheme, turned to be a dream in the second decade of the 21st century.

Of all the developed countries it is only Japan that has maintained its economic assistance programme on a large scale for Sri Lanka. Sri Lanka being categorized as a middle income country, albeit at the lower level, but much better off than many other countries, has led them to be deemed to be more deserving of concessional Western assistance. The government has now renegotiated most of the existing Chinese projects. There is the possibility of a leap forward in cooperation if the Hambantota port project goes through, though at the political cost of a permanent Chinese presence that has deep political implications for Sri Lanka’s relations with neighboring India. The government is attempting to balance this out by having Indian investments and also by entering into the Economic and Technology Cooperation Agreement (ECTA) with India, while also having free trade agreements with China and Pakistan.

COMMON POSITION

The second area on which there needs to be greater agreement between the two coalition partners is the issue of inter-ethnic reconciliation and post-war justice. The ethnic conflict is the most divisive issue in the country, which has defied seven decades of post-independence political initiatives aimed at conflict resolution. The problem in the past is that the efforts of one party to resolve the problem were always undermined by the other. There is presently a high degree of dissatisfaction within the Tamil polity that the government is proceeding too slowly in addressing the issues that have debilitated them in the past. The constitutional reform process, which seemed to be proceeding smoothly, now appears to be stalled due to the differences of opinion within the coalition partners. Efforts to undo the ill effects of the war are also proceeding at a slow pace.

At the last session of the UN Human Rights Council in Geneva which took place a fortnight ago the government was successful in obtaining a two year extension to deliver on the promises it had made in October 2015, but which remain largely unfulfilled. In the course of his presentations to the international community in Geneva, Foreign Minister Mangala Samaraweera said that the government intended to keep its promises due to its concern for its Tamil citizens, and not because of international pressure. However, those who oppose the government’s co-sponsoring of the UNHRC resolution are attempting to mobilise the opposition of the general public. They claim that the government has agreed to a hybrid court which would bring international judges into Sri Lanka in violation of the country’s sovereignty. On the controversial issue of foreign judges sitting in judgment on Sri Lankan military leaders, both President Sirisena and Prime Minister Ranil Wickremesinghe have taken a common position.

The failure of the government to implement the legislation pertaining to the Office of Missing Persons, which was promised to address the grievances of those thousands who are missing their loved ones in the war, needs to be overcome by a similar common stance by the two leaders. The recent decision of the government to return the military occupied land in Keppapilavu, which was the subject of prolonged civilian protest, is an indication that unified decisionmaking is on track. Altogether, a total of 468 acres of land are to be released. The Defence Ministry has said that the ongoing release of military-held land was taking place under the directions of President Sirisena and Prime Minister Wickremesinghe. It is important that on other controversial issues, ranging from Chinese projects and the ECTA economic agreement with India that the leaders of the government take on a similar unified position. The government needs to ensure that decisions that are taken are implemented. This can lead to the investor confidence that is currently lacking to the detriment of economic progress.

Genocides of Tamils and Indo-Sri Lanka relations

BY DR. ABDUL RUFFAPR 03, 2017

Sri Lankan regime, committed only to protect and promote majority Singhalese, continues to attack the helpless Tamil fishermen on sea but Lankan-Tamil relations have been very old. The relationship between India and Sri Lanka is more than 2,500 years old with both countries having a legacy of intellectual, cultural, religious and linguistic interaction.

Genocides of Tamils and Indo.docx by Thavam Ratna on Scribd

Constitutional Reform and Political Diversions

2017-04-03

The Government is dragging out the Constitutional Reform process. Is it a lack of political will? Fear of reaction from the Joint Opposition? Or preoccupation with the crisis-prone economy?  
Historically, it has been a combination of all three - rickety political will, fear of political backlash and repeated economic crises - that derailed efforts at constitutional reform. Rather than mere barriers to constitutional reform, I would argue that these three concerns are part and parcel of the political solution itself.   

Postcolonial woes

The promise of the postcolonial Sri Lankan state was from its outset betrayed by oppression and exclusion. Since independence, the majoritarian and class logics of the state have alienated minority communities and marginalised much of the rural and urban population. The response of the state to protests by these peoples was to repress or placate, the latter often through the provision of economic relief.   
The original sin of the postcolonial state was one of the worst acts of exclusion with the disenfranchisement of the Up-Country Tamils. Efforts that claimed to be inclusive, for instance indigenisation of language policy, culminated in “Sinhala Only”, which excluded over a quarter of the country’s population whose first language was Tamil.  
State repression led to escalation of youth movements in the north and the south, and eventually insurrections and protracted armed conflicts. The tyranny meted out by the state during the first JVP insurrection of 1971 without addressing youth grievances only led to the even more brutal insurgency and counter-insurgency of the late 1980s. The efforts to crush Tamil militancy with the Prevention of Terrorism Act and the state of Emergency in the late 1970s only saw militancy spread and grow. The escalation of the conflicts with armed movements, led to more and more state repression, in cycles of mass violence.  
Next, top-down approaches to ‘development,’ touted to address the grievances of oppressed classes and minorities have equally failed. Colonization and agricultural schemes in the 1950s and 1960s, did little to address the mounting alienation of the rural Sinhala youth. Instead, they aggravated the fears of the Tamil population that they may be dispossessed from their lands. Similarly, the left forces that constituted the United Front government pandered to Sinhala Buddhist nationalism in taking forward their version of socialist economic development. While the import substitution policies led to an agricultural boom benefiting the North in the 1970s, such economic changes could not counter the rise of Tamil nationalist militancy.  
Arguably ideologies that spawn ethno-nationalist movements and youth insurrections have complex causes and dynamics, but what is clear from our tragic history is that repression and economic development alone cannot address them. The Rajapaksa regime’s post-war experiment most clearly shows us that the push for economic development as a solution combined with militarised repression, only polarised the country and was soundly rejected.  

Democracy and Rulers

When the State addresses challenges against it with repression and economic hand-outs, the citizenry responds politically with protests, and at crucial moments voting out regimes. However, the need throughout history has been for a political force that can engage the people and bring together those who have been ravaged by oppression and exclusion. The election of the PA Government in 1994 was a moment of hope for such a political solution and to address the dispossession of the peasantry and the working classes. However, the LTTE’s return to war and the then Government’s continuation of neo-liberal policies ended that opening.  

"The promise of the postcolonial Sri Lankan state was from its outset betrayed by oppression and exclusion"

The major problem in our history, is that successive regimes at the helm of state power have repeatedly failed to engage the public with a far reaching political vision. Such democratic engagement requires political will, challenging the opposition head on and addressing economic issues that are so much a part of the body politic. However, beyond the democratic vision of regimes, they are also constrained by the classes and political bases they are beholden to.   
Historically, the cunning of rulers has been to separate their political and economic manoeuvres. The Jayewardene regime, for example, took forward open economic policies to serve its class interests, even as it piped up its Sinhala Buddhist leanings to maintain a broad political base. And as the economic policies increased inequalities and disaffected its political base, the regime became more and more repressive. The attacks on the Tamil community projected as the enemy, as with the July 1983 pogrom, were also its efforts to mobilise its Sinhala Buddhist base. Of course, at some point such contradictions are exposed to the public, but by then the damage is done.   

Political Engagement

The current Government also approaches the political and economic processes in isolation. Even worse, they seem to believe that constitutional reform experts and economic policy gurus can substitute for mobilising and engaging the people. It is the neo-liberal conceit of governments that leads them to believe that legal and economic experts can determine the structure and policies of the state and its relationship to its citizens. Time and again, such an approach, has ended in failure.  
In 2015, there was an overwhelming mandate for constitutional reform. The citizenry from the different communities voted courageously in the Presidential election, and again supported the Government in the general elections held eight months later. Yet, by mid-2016, the Government had transferred its mandate to experts. The constitutional process went into close door sessions, ignoring for the most part, the outcome of the Public Representation Committee on Constitutional Reforms (PRC). The PRC, despite the limitations placed on it by the Government, had meaningfully engaged the people.   
If the last year, after the PRC proceedings, have been a loss for the constitutional reform process, the Government and the TNA leadership only have themselves to blame for not having engaged the public. Such engagement is also necessary to confront the nationalist mobilisations in both the South and the North. Indeed, as our past history illustrates the oppositional forces in parliament mobilising chauvinist forces onto the streets and the separatist military moves of the LTTE have disrupted many an effort at a political solution.   
In the year ahead, it is not just chauvinist politics that will create trouble for constitution making, the mounting economic problems may well deflect the political process. Indeed, times of economic crisis are opportune moments for chauvinist forces. A government that engages the people on its political and economic programme can carry them through tumultuous times, but that is not the case with the current Government.   

People and the State

If the postcolonial state was hijacked by majoritarian and class interests, any reform of the state would have to take on both simultaneously. There is only one way to do this, and that is through public engagement.  
In this context, the neo-liberal elite and think tanks in Colombo also reinforce expert-led – as opposed to people-centred – political and economic processes. They oppose the inclusion of economic, social and cultural rights (ESCR) in the Constitution. It is not that constitutional provisions for ESCR on their own will guarantee social welfare. Indeed, legal provisions without peoples’ movements have achieved little, as evident from the experience in many parts of the world. The aversion to ESCR of these legal and economic experts reflects their class character and reluctance to place juridical constraints on the state, which denies the marginalised economic justice.  

"The aversion to ESCR of these legal and economic experts reflects their class character and reluctance to place juridical constraints on the state, which denies the marginalised economic justice"

The Sinhala Buddhist nationalist constituencies are rallying around and insisting on preserving the unitary concept of the state. However, the broader South has not been engaged on the unitary state as a relentless structure of centralised power used for political repression and economic dispossession. Rather, the bogey of separatism is brought out to justify majoritarian control and development priorities that will undermine regional concerns.  
Extensive devolution of power within a united Sri Lanka has anchored the debate on constitutional reform for many progressives since the 1990s. We need to go further and look at how devolution relates to class and other social structures, including caste, gender and the neglected minorities such as the Northern Muslims and the Up-Country Tamils. Those concerns were also echoed by the diverse groups of people who came forward to engage the PRC last year.   
If the people in the rural countryside and in the urban shanties - who are day in day out ignored by policies of the centralised state in Colombo that is for example prioritising building the port city and a financial centre - have a say about the unitary state, they are far more likely to shed it than those close to state power. If the bulk of our population, who are students, teachers, patients, healthcare providers or their relatives, are asked about free education and health, they are indeed likely to support the enshrinement of economic rights in the Constitution, than the small section of the elite who can rely on private education and healthcare.   
The ordinary people in the North and the South, who face the common predicament of eking out a livelihood and the increasing precariousness of social and economic life, are more likely to find ways of co-existing with other communities, than the political elite who live off majoritarian and nationalist fears. But such a people-centred democratic process of state reform is rarely given a chance, because the role of the modern state in the capitalist system has been one of oppressing and excluding people.  

UK Home Office publishes new policy on Sri Lanka

Apr 03, 2017

The British Home Office this week published an updated policy guidance and information note on Sri Lanka aimed at decision makers handling the granting of protection and human rights claims for Tamils.

The updated policy guidance, which follows the country guidance of GJ & Others in 2013, stated that there had been "positive developments" since the new government led by President Sirisena came to office and "an improved environment for civil society and human rights defenders has also been reported". 

 

Commenting on the new guidance, Jan Jananayagam of Together Against Genocide (TAG) said, "this home office policy flies in the face of recent events in Sri lanka, including overt surveillance and intimidation of protestors by the navy, police and other security services, the government of Sri Lanka’s willingness to promote those responsible for mass atrocities against Tamil civilians and those responsible for systemic torture of Tamils to senior positions."

 

"It is internationally recognised that there is a disjoint between GOSL’s English language rhetoric and symbolic acts, and its Sinhala language rhetoric and actions in the country. The Home office has failed to base its guidance on actual actions," she added. 

 

“As recent arrests of European Tamils returning on holiday to Sri Lanka show, all those who participate in any form of political activity, be they protests or advocacy, in the diaspora remain at risk on return.”

 

See full policy guidance here. Extracts reproduced below: 

 

"Unlike in the past, returnees who have a previous connection with the LTTE are able to return to their communities without suffering ill-treatment. Civil society groups on the ground did not report recent issues of ill-treatment. The police interest, if any, is not in any previous involvement with the LTTE, but on whether the person has committed any criminal act. This is because many had left the country using forged identities and the police were therefore seeking to establish the true identity of the returning person and whether they are wanted for any criminal acts in addition to leaving the country with false documents."

 

"There are reports of arrest and detentions. However, the scale and extent is difficult to quantify. Reliable information is not available due to a lack of published data, vagaries and/or exaggeration in numbers cited and the potential lack of neutrality in pro-Tamil reportage."

 

"Since GJ & Others was handed down, the new government under President Sirisena has de-proscribed a number of Tamil groups/diaspora organisations, which indicates that involvement with such organisations is not of itself seen as a threat to the integrity of the state (see De-proscription of Tamil groups). However, the situation is not sufficiently different in principle to justify a departure from the Tribunal’s findings in GJ & Others. Decision makers must consider each case on its facts and consider whether any diaspora activities in which the person has engaged are, or are likely to be, perceived as a ‘significant role’ such to make them of ongoing interest to the Sri Lankan authorities and/or that their activities will be, or will be perceived as being, a threat to the integrity of the state."

 

"Unlike its predecessor, the current government – which was formed since GJ & Others was heard and promulgated – has shown willingness for allegations of war crimes during the final phase of the conflict to be fully investigated, and has established its own truth, justice, and reconciliation commission to investigate potential war crimes."

 

"Since the new government came to office in 2015, ‘white van’ abductions are now seldom reported. The number of torture complaints has greatly reduced. However, new cases of Tamil victims continue to emerge and police reportedly often continue to resort to violence and excessive force, particularly when extracting confessions. Such treatment is reported to be common in relation to criminal investigations, regardless of the nature of the suspected offence. Decision makers should also note that many human rights reports on Sri Lanka use the term ‘torture’ to cover a very wide range of treatment ranging from forceful questioning or threats, through to the most severe forms of ill-treatment."

 

tamilguardian.com

UK guidance on Sri Lanka : Significantly Downplays Ongoing HR Violations

( April 4, 2017, London, Sri Lanka Guardian) Freedom from Torture is deeply concerned about new policy advice produced by the UK Government’s Home Office in respect of Sri Lanka. The Country Policy and Information Note on “Sri Lanka: Tamil separatism”, published on 31 March 2017, emphasises improvements in the country since the election of President Sirisena in January 2015, but significantly downplays on-going human rights violations.

This is in stark contrast to the reports of the United Nations (UN) and of non-governmental organisations, and to a debate about Sri Lanka which took place only two weeks ago at the UN in Geneva.

The Home Office’s updated policy provides guidance for decision makers on handling particular types of protection and human rights claims, including for granting asylum, humanitarian protection or discretionary leave to remain in the UK.

The policy guidance seeks to discredit reports of torture and ill-treatment on the grounds that such reports “use the term ‘torture’ to cover a very wide range of treatment ranging from forceful questioning or threats, through to the most severe forms of ill-treatment”.

In 2016, Sri Lanka was the top country of origin for torture survivors referred to Freedom from Torture for clinical services and medico-legal reports for the sixth consecutive year. These referrals include survivors of torture who have been detained since the current government took office.

Freedom from Torture has also identified a significant number of people who have reported being tortured on their return to Sri Lanka from the UK. In his report to the recent Human Rights Council meeting, the High Commissioner for Human Rights recognised this risk and called on states to ensure that Tamils who have suffered torture and other violations are not returned to Sri Lanka until relevant guarantees are in place to ensure that they will be not subject to further violations.

This is another area where the Home Office appears determined to minimise the risk to those who may return to the country. Contrary to Freedom from Torture’s evidence, Home Office guidance suggests that the Sri Lankan police are not interested in a person’s possible links to the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE), but rather whether the person committed a criminal act and used false documents to leave the country.

Freedom from Torture is calling for an urgent review of the guidance to avoid individuals being wrongly returned to face torture or ill-treatment.

Ann Hannah, Director of Policy and Advocacy at Freedom from Torture, said:

“This guidance is misleading at best, if not downright dangerous. Sri Lanka has been criticised by a number of human rights bodies and organisations in the last year, including the UN Special Rapporteur on Torture who found that a “culture of torture persists”. The UN Committee against Torture recently concluded that the use of torture remains routine.

“The UN Special Rapporteurs on Torture and on the Independence of Judges and Lawyers also highlighted the continuing problem of impunity surrounding both old and new cases of human rights violations. There is every possibility that decisions based on the new Country Guidance will result in people at risk of torture being denied protection and returned to Sri Lanka, in violation of the UK’s obligations under international law. The Home Office has selectively quoted UN reports and our research and evidence to produce an inaccurate picture of the human rights situation and the government of Sri Lanka’s willingness to address abuses.”

Sri Lankan workers protest imprisonment of Maruti employees

Members of Sri Lankan Trade Unions protesting outside the Indian High Commission in Colombo.   | Photo Credit: Photo credit: Meera Srinivasan

Meera Srinivasan-

APRIL 03, 2017

COLOMBO: Expressing solidarity with their counterparts across the Palk Bay, Sri Lankan trade unions on Monday protested against the “attack” on Maruti workers.

With posters displaying slogans in Sinhala, Tamil and English asking the Indian State to stop “prosecuting” workers, leaders and members of different unions here gathered outside the Indian mission’s premises on Colombo’s sea-facing Galle Road.

Observing that workers in India and Sri Lanka faced similar challenges, Anton Marcus, Joint Secretary of the Free Trade Zones & General Services Employees Union said that often, imprisonment was used to intimidate working people and to discourage them from unionising in future. “That is what we are seeing in this case involving Maruti workers. It is important that we stand in solidarity in times like these,” he said.

 

In March this year, a district court in New Delhi sentenced 13 workers of Maruti Udyog to life imprisonment for allegedly killing the Human Resources manager at its plant in Manesar in 2012. “We are terribly concerned about the repression of workers in India, especially in this case of life imprisonment for the Maruti workers. We oppose and condemn this,” said Linus Jayatilake, President of the Union Federation of Labour.

The group of protestors, numbering nearly 30 persons, included student-activists from the Inter-University Student Federation of Sri Lanka, which works across 10 state universities in the island. “This is not an issue about India alone, we see very similar problems here as well,” said Federation convenor Lahiru Weerasekara, referring to a recent case in which the Sri Lankan police reportedly slapped heavy fines on 37 contractual workers of the Ceylon Electricity Board who had protested demanding permanent employment.

“This attack on workers cannot be seen outside of the domination of a neoliberal state. Police or legal action is only a way of telling them ‘this is what we will do if you protest demanding your rights,” the student leader said.