Diplomacy: US-Sri Lanka first-ever naval exercise set for October

We hope that one day in the not too distant future, all the navies of this region can jointly participate in exercises and coordinate maritime activities to build collective capacity and uphold international standards.

by Alice G. Wells-Sep 1, 2017

( September 1, 2017, Colombo, Sri Lanka Guardian) Acting Assistant Secretary of State for South and Central Asian Affairs Alice G. Wells said today that the US is expanding the navy-to-navy relationship with Sri Lanka, with the first-ever naval exercise set for October.

Speaking at the Indo-Pacific Regional Architecture Indian Ocean Conference 2017 in Colombo today, Ms. Wells said that expanding naval cooperation is a priority for the United States.

Here is the text of Ms. Wells’s speech today:

Thank you for that kind introduction. I also want to acknowledge the India Foundation, and its partners in Singapore and Sri Lanka, for their leadership in organizing this conference.

Let me begin by reaffirming a long-standing facet of U.S. foreign policy: that the United States is – and will continue to be – an Indo-Pacific power.

For more than seven decades, we have embraced the responsibilities this distinction requires across this vast expanse, from the shores of East Africa to the western coast of the Americas. This will not change in the decades to come.

America’s connection to this dynamic region is not new; more than two centuries ago, ships from New England sailed along trade routes in the Indian Ocean carrying spices, tea, and even ice between Boston and Kolkata.

Fast forwarding to today, our partnerships and shared strategic interests in this region remain as compelling as ever. In the next few minutes, I want to share our vision for the Indian Ocean, as well as the precepts guiding U.S. engagement and diplomacy.

First, we must have a common vision for the Indian Ocean that enhances economic growth, transparent development, and regional integration. Regional initiatives that prioritize accountability, open markets, and delivery of tangible benefits to citizens of the region will be the most sustainable.

Second, countries must be able to effectively counter security threats in the Indian Ocean as well as respond to humanitarian and environmental disasters. Through joint capacity building and exercises, we can share the security burden in this increasingly complex region.

Finally, we must support a principled regional architecture that unites us to support international standards, including freedom of navigation and the peaceful resolution of disputes. All nations have the right to freely fly, sail, and operate wherever international law allows.

Let’s start with the economic imperatives. The Indian Ocean is at the fulcrum of global trade and commerce, with nearly half of the world’s 90,000 commercial vessels and two thirds of global oil trade traveling through its sea lanes.

The region boasts some of the fastest-growing economies on Earth, and is home to a quarter of the world’s population, 500 million of whom still lack access to reliable power.

We believe bolstering economic integration will lead to sustainable and inclusive growth. For example, if South and Southeast Asia reduced non-tariff barriers by 50 percent – an ambitious but attainable goal – increased intra-region trade would net $568 billion in increased GDP by 2030.

Already, American companies operate across the region, supplying everything from bottled drinks to airplane parts. In India alone, over 600 American companies have contributed to a 500 percent increase in FDI over the past two years. The United States plans to deliver over $600 million dollars of investment into Nepal’s transportation and energy sectors, yet another sign that our commercial ties to the Indian Ocean are growing deeper by the day.

We are partnering with South Asian countries to develop legal and regulatory regimes that encourage transparent FDI, build resilient energy infrastructure, and connect budding entrepreneurs with the resources they need to develop their ideas. As President Trump and Prime Minister Modi underscored during their June summit, both India and the United States are committed to bolstering regional economic connectivity through transparent infrastructure development and responsible debt financing practices.

The U.S. is building partnerships through the Safe Ocean Network to combat illegal, unreported, and unregulated fishing, an issue threatening maritime economies around the world. This initiative encourages coordinated action to detect violations, enforce laws, and prosecute those engaged in illegal activities. More than 40 partners from around the world have joined the Safe Ocean Network, and we welcome every nation here to join.

In South Asia, our regional partners are doing their part. India is forging stronger trade and infrastructure ties with its neighbors through its Act East policy. In one example, Bangladesh, India, and Nepal are implementing a Motor Vehicle Agreement to allow free movement of goods and people across their borders.

We also commend progress in BIMSTEC and hope agreements on electricity grid connectivity and transport can be finalized before the next BIMSTEC Summit.

While the region offers unprecedented opportunity, it is also confronting a myriad of security challenges, including terrorism, transnational crime, trafficking-in-persons, and illicit drugs.

To combat these challenges, the United States has sought to improve intelligence-sharing among regional partners and improve capacity-building in areas like community policing, counter-narcotics, aviation security, and forensics analysis. There is also a critical need to expand engagement on maritime domain awareness. In the increasingly crowded maritime environment, the sharing of reliable information is the foundation for greater cooperation.

The United States is also committed to building the coast guard capacity of our Indian Ocean partners. Two weeks from today, Japan will be hosting the Global Coast Guard Forum, enhancing cooperation on maritime pollution prevention, law-enforcement, search and rescue, and many other issues. Every nation here is encouraged to attend.

Expanding naval cooperation is another priority for the United States. The U.S.-India-Japan MALABAR Naval exercise in July was our largest and most complex to date, involving over ten thousand personnel.

We are also expanding our navy-to-navy relationship with Sri Lanka, with our first-ever naval exercise set for October. With Bangladesh, we value our continued engagement through regular exercises like the Southeast Asia Cooperation and Training series.

We hope that one day in the not too distant future, all the navies of this region can jointly participate in exercises and coordinate maritime activities to build collective capacity and uphold international standards.

In order to realize our shared goal of an Indian Ocean region that is open, principled, and resilient, we will need a robust regional framework for bilateral and multilateral cooperation – one in which all states have a say and are invested in decision-making and outcomes. Regional partners must adhere to a common vision that:

· Respects international law as reflected in the Law of the Sea Convention;

· Supports economic, political, and social linkages between South and East Asia;

· Develops the region’s humanitarian and disaster relief capacity through maritime exercises involving all Indian Ocean partners; and

· Encourages Indian Ocean economies to embrace visa liberalization, competitive markets, and accessible medical and educational facilities.

Last Month, President Trump proclaimed that the United States is “committed to pursuing our shared objectives for peace and security in South Asia and the broader Indo-Pacific region.”

This vision builds upon the Indian Ocean principles the President and Prime Minister Modi announced in June. Our desire for a common vision signifies our enduring commitment to this region and our shared goals of promoting peace, security, freedom of navigation, and a sustainable and open architecture across the Indian Ocean.

We invite every nation here to join in this common endeavor. And, through our collective leadership, we can be a model for the rest of the world.

SRI LANKA MONITORING ACCOUNTABILITY PANEL TO RELEASE A THEMATIC REPORT ADDRESSING ALTERNATIVE AVENUES FOR REDRESS AND ACCOUNTABILITY.

Image: Disappearance day 2017 in Colombo.

01/09/2017

Issuing a press release to mark the  International Day of the Victims of Enforced Disappearances the  Sri Lanka Monitoring Accountability Panel (MAP) says that “in light of the GSL’s lack of progress to date, the MAP will soon release a thematic report addressing alternative avenues for redress and accountability for the mass crimes committed during and after Sri Lanka’s armed conflict.”

The press release in full follows:

The 30th of August marks the International Day of the Victims of Enforced Disappearances. This day has a particular resonance for the Sri Lankan Tamil community whose members have been subjected to decades of abductions, secret prisons, and disappearances at the hands of the Sri Lankan Army and security services. As noted previously by the UN Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights the ‘scale of enforced disappearances in Sri Lanka has long been exceptional’. Historically,
disappearances have been used ‘to target those perceived as critical of the Government [of Sri Lanka (GSL)], supportive of opposition movements, or involved in armed conflict’ and have been largely perpetrated by GSL security forces ‘in collusion with paramilitary groups’. The victims of enforced disappearance are not only the disappeared themselves, but also their family members. Today, no doubt, many thousands of Sri Lankans will be reflecting on this and other aspects of the country’s unfortunate history.

This press release comes in advance of the Thirty-Sixth Session of the UN Human Rights Council (HRC) to be held in Geneva from 11–29 September 2017. The MAP urges all stakeholders to work towards the meaningful implementation of the HRC’s Resolution of October 2015 on ‘Promoting reconciliation, accountability, and human rights in Sri Lanka’ (Resolution 30/1), including a functioning Office of Missing Persons and a law criminalizing enforced disappearances.

In July 2017, the Transitional Government of Tamil Eelam extended the mandate of the Sri Lanka Monitoring Accountability Panel (MAP) for a further two years. The recomposed panel of three international legal experts will continue to provide independent monitoring of the transitional justice mechanisms in Sri Lanka, including the judicial measures to investigate and prosecute war crimes, crimes against humanity, and genocide.

Despite co-sponsoring Resolution 30/1, the GSL has largely failed to establish the promised accountability mechanisms to address the crimes committed during the protracted civil war between the Government of Sri Lanka (the ‘GSL’) and the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam, which ended in 2009 and left more than 40,000 dead and some 280,000 displaced. In particular, the GSL has capitulated to domestic political pressures and resisted the inclusion of foreign judges and prosecutors in a special criminal court.

In response to these failings, the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights encouraged Member States to ‘[w]herever possible, in particular under universal jurisdiction, investigate and prosecute those allegedly responsible for such violations as torture, enforced disappearance, war crimes and crimes against humanity’. The MAP has previously argued that, if the GSL continues in its current obstructionist vein, the UN Security Council should refer Sri Lanka to the International Criminal Court.

Since the release of the MAP’s Second Spot Report on 28 February 2017, the Human Rights Council has granted the GSL an additional two years in which to implement the processes envisaged in Resolution 30/1. Regrettably, the HRC did not impose any further demands on the GSL or set benchmarks for its compliance with the Resolution.

In the six months following this seemingly pro forma extension, there have been a number of notable developments, which illustrate the failures of the GSL’s transitional justice program:

• In April, Amnesty International issued a report focusing on the stories of victims’ 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.’

• In May, the GSL cabinet approved a third draft of the Counter Terrorism Act (CTA)—meant to replace the draconian and reviled Prevention of Terrorism Act (PTA) which remains in force to date—but no parliamentary vote has yet been set. According to Human Rights Watch, ‘Sri Lanka’s latest counterterrorism bill falls far short of the government’s pledges to the United Nations Human Rights Council to end abusive detention without charge’ and ‘would still permit many of the abuses occurring under [the PTA]’ while raising ‘a number of new concerns including broad and vague definitions of terrorist acts, warrantless arrests, and undue limitations on freedom of expression.

• In June, the GSL announced it would appoint a ministerial committee—chaired by Prime Minister Ranil Wickremesinghe—to coordinate the recommendations made in Resolution 30/1. However, the committee’s precise mandate and proposed plans have yet to be clarified.

• In July, the UN’s Special Rapporteur on human rights and counter-terrorism Ben Emmerson announced the preliminary findings of his recent mission to Sri Lanka. According to Mr Emmerson, ‘Sri Lanka continues to use torture against people detained on national security grounds, and its progress on human rights, reforms, and justice remain woefully slow.’ Additionally, ‘[a]ll the evidence points to the fact that the use of torture was “routine and endemic” against people held under the deeply-flawed [PTA]’. Unsurprisingly, the ‘Tamil community has borne the brunt of the State’s well-oiled torture apparatus, as the law is used disproportionately against them’. It was reported that ‘80% of suspects arrested under the anti-terror legislation in late 2016 had reported torture and other physical ill-treatment’. The Special Rapporteur will present a comprehensive report with his findings and recommendations to the UN Human Rights Council in March 2018.

• In July, President Sirisena officially signed the gazette on the Office of Missing Persons (OMP). While the spokesman for the UN Secretary General called the development a ‘significant milestone for all Sri Lankans still searching for the truth about missing loved ones’, the OMP has yet to become operational and the GSL’s intentions with respect to the office are dubious. A recent press report suggests that the OMP may be used to whitewash the past: ‘The government last week said the OMP will put to end the possibility of disappearances in the future and no one will be prosecuted for past action’. Moreover, Sri Lanka’s domestic political opposition factions have ‘slammed the move as a betrayal of the troops which crushed the LTTE’s three-decade-long separatist campaign’. Previously, the MAP has been critical of the OMP (as currently formulated) for: (1) failing to ensure the independence and impartiality of its membership and (2) potentially impeding any consequent efforts of a special court by way of overly protective confidentiality and immunity provisions.

• In July, the International Truth and Justice Project (ITJP) issued a report documenting 21 cases of abduction, illegal detention, torture, and/or sexual violence against Tamil victims by the Sri Lankan security forces in 2016 and 2017.

• In August, Sri Lanka’s army chief Mahesh Senanayake described the country’s military as a ‘highly disciplined’ force that did not commit ‘any offences’ during the civil war, noting that ‘[t]here can’t be murderers among war heroes’ and ‘[t]hose who fought the war will not be punished’. This standard political line, which has been adopted by many actors in the GSL and military, suggests that any national war crimes investigations may face interference from powerful forces.

• In August, Sri Lanka’s new foreign minister Tilak Marapana repeated the GSL’s consistent yet erroneous position that foreign judges could not be accommodated in domestic judicial mechanisms in accordance with the country’s constitution. As noted previously by the MAP, there is nothing in the constitution or any other Sri Lankan law that amounts to such a prohibition. Hybrid courts with international judicial assistance have functioned around the world in various legal environments that have been adapted for such specific purposes. There is simply no legal reason why Sri Lanka could not do the same.

In addition to recent developments, longstanding issues continue to fester. These include: the sustained militarization of Sri Lanka’s Tamil-dominant Northern and Eastern Provinces (including the occupation of civilian land); continued detention of political prisoners; a lack of security-sector and constitutional reform; and harassment of religious and ethnic minorities and human rights defenders.
As recently noted in a report issued by Amnesty International (Amnesty Report), one of the ‘important steps’ taken by the GSL since the adoption of Resolution 30/1 has been the ratification of the International Convention for the Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearance.
 However, the GSL’s commitments under the convention have yet to be fulfilled. A parliamentary debate on a bill criminalizing enforced disappearance scheduled for July 2017 was postponed without explanation. And, as noted, the success of the OMP remains an open question.

In light of the above, the MAP hereby calls on the GSL to adopt all of the recommendations contained in the Second Spot Report as well as those set out in the Amnesty Report. In particular, the GSL should:

• criminalize enforce disappearances as a matter of urgency;

• operationalize the OMP as soon as possible, ensure its independence, and consider amendments in light of the MAP’s previous criticisms;

• repeal the PTA, replace it with legislation that meets international standards, and provide immediate and meaningful judicial review of detention orders made pursuant to the old law;
• begin taking the preliminary practical steps necessary for the eventual establishment of a special court, including: amending substantive law to include international crimes and modes of liability, developing a system for the collection and preservation of evidence, enhancing witness protection systems, and establishing an outreach program regarding accountability mechanisms and issues.
In light of the GSL’s lack of progress to date, the MAP will soon release a thematic report addressing alternative avenues for redress and accountability for the mass crimes committed during and after Sri Lanka’s armed conflict.

(The MAP provides independent monitoring, advice, and recommendations, focusing on the effectiveness of accountability measures from a victims’ perspective. Its views and recommendations will enable victims and other stakeholders to participate more effectively in the transitional justice process and thus enhance the legitimacy of measures taken.

For more information, please visit: http://war-victims-map.org; and for media enquiries, please contact Richard J Rogers: richardrogers@globaldiligence.com)

• Sri Lanka Monitoring Accountability Panel (MAP): PRESS RELEASE

 Field Marshal Fonseka says he has evidence General Jagath Jayasuriya committed war crimes



Fri, Sep 1, 2017,

Sept 01, Colombo: Commander of Sri Lanka Army during the last phase of war against LTTE, Regional Development Minister Field Marshal Sarath Fonseka claims he has evidence that his successor General Jagath Jayasuriya has committed war crimes.

Field Marshal Fonseka said that Jayasuriya had committed wrongdoing in the Vavuniya area during the war and later as the Army Commander and he is prepared to give evidence in a tribunal.

The Minister said that he received complaints that former Army Commander General Jagath Jayasuriya, who was in charge of protecting the persons who were in custody during the last phase of the war and engaged in providing supplies to the Army front lines, was involved in crimes.

Field Marshal Fonseka made these remarks in response to the statement made to the media by General Jayasuriya that the then Army Commander Sarath Fonseka was in charge of military operations at that time.

International Truth and Justice Project (ITJP) has accused the former commander General Jagath Jayasuriya, who was ambassador to Brazil and few other South American countries until last week, of committing war crimes and has filed a case against him in Brazil and Colombia.

"He did not control the fighting on the battlefield, but he people who were being arrested and surrendered came under his control, and I was informed that he committed some crimes," said Field Marshal Sarath Fonseka at a media briefing at the Regional Development Ministry office in Colombo.

Field Marshal Sarath Fonseka said the "this process continued" even after Jayasuriya became the Army Commander.

"I have information about those crimes, and legal action is taken, I will give evidnece as a witness," Minister Fonseka told BBC Sinhala Service.

Minister Fonseka further said that after the end of the war, an investigation was scheduled into the "crimes" committed by Jayasuriya and even a lieutenant who acted as General Jayasuirya's deputy was arrested as an initial measure.

However, the Field Marshal said he was removed from his post at the commencement of the inquiry.
"I have information that he received blessings from the then Defense Secretary, the then ruler, on his crimes," Fonseka said.

The cases filed in Brazil and Bogot� on Monday (August 28) by the International Truth and Justice Project charge that General Jagath Jayasuriya was personally responsible for the orders given to military units to carry out repeated attacks on hospitals, torture and sexual violence, forcible abductions and arbitrary assassinations.

However, General Jayasuriya, who spoke to the BBC's Sinhala service, vehemently rejects the allegations saying that he was not given a front-line operational role in the war.

Sri Lanka defends General accused of war crimes against LTTE

Aug 31, 2017

The Sri Lankan government today came out in defence of a former Army Commander accused of committing war crimes during the brutal civil war against the LTTE, saying every death in the three-decade long conflict cannot be treated as a human rights abuse case.

Government spokesman Rajitha Senaratne said the government was prepared to probe any specific charges made against the military and Commander Jagath Jayasuriya.

 

Senaratne, who is also the Health Minister, said the accusations against Jayasuriya were of a general nature.

 

“Every death which occurred during the civil war could not treated as a case of human rights abuse as we were conducting a war against terrorism,” he added.

 

The Army spokesman Brigadier Roshan Seneviratne said the allegations were baseless.

 

The International Truth and Justice Project, a human rights group had filed war crimes charges in Brazil and Colombia against Jayasuriya, who was the Sri Lankan Ambassador to Brazil.

 

He was also accredited to four more countries in the Latin American region.

 

The lawsuit filed in Brasilia and Bogota on Monday alleged that General Jayasuriya bore individual criminal responsibility as the Commander of units that committed repeated attacks on hospitals, acts of torture and sexual violence, enforced disappearances and extra-judicial killings.

 

Jayasuriya was commanding the Sri Lankan Army’s Wanni brigade in the north of the country where conflict raged during the last phase of the war with the LTTE.

 

He later succeeded war wining commander Sarath Fonseka as the overall Army chief.

 

As recognition for their services towards ending the 30 years long armed conflict some senior military personnel were given plum diplomatic postings, including Jayasuriya who was appointed as Sri Lanka’s ambassador to Brazil.

 

Sri Lanka faced UN Human Rights Council (UNHRC) resolutions for alleged human rights abuses during the last phase of the conflict.

 

Sri Lanka’s human rights record, particularly over the impunity enjoyed by law enforcement officers, has been the subject of international condemnation.

 

The UNHRC demanded accountability mechanisms to probe rights abuses blamed on both the LTTE and the government forces that ended in 2009.

 

Sri Lanka is averse to setting up of an international hybrid court with local and foreign judges to investigate the alleged war crimes committed by the government troops and the LTTE in the last phase of the conflict.

 

Relatives of the missing Tamil people allege that the Lankan state – particularly its army, navy and police – were behind most of the disappearances.

 

According to the government figures, around 20,000 people are missing due to various conflicts including the civil war with Lankan Tamils in the north and east which claimed at least 100,000 lives.

 

The LTTE, which led the separatist war for a separate Tamil homeland, was finally crushed by the Lankan military in 2009 with the death its supremo Velupillai Prabhakaran.

 

www.india.com

Sri Lanka: The centre - stage of the 21st century ?

• The second Indian Ocean Conference taking place in Colombo from 31 August to 1 September is an opportune time to re-examine the geo-strategic significance of Sri Lanka and its immense potential

 Friday, 1 September 2017 

The 21st century is regarded as the Asian Century. With China and India, the rising Asian giants rapidly expanding their economies and becoming increasingly dependent on the Indian Ocean for trade, the third largest ocean in the world has never been more important than today.

Sri Lanka The centre - stage of the 21st century.docx by Thavam Ratna on Scribd

Jaffna Hate Crime Leadership By Northern Chief C.V. Wigneswaran

By S. Ratnajeevan H. Hoole –SEPTEMBER 2, 2017

Prof. S. Ratnajeevan H. Hoole

Dedicated to the Memory and Heritage of the Democrat, Peace-maker, Tamil Leader, and Martyr to the Tamil Cause, Appapillai Amirthalingam on the occasion of his 90th Birthday Celebrations at the Jaffna Public Library Auditorium at 4:00 pm on Sunday 3 Sept. 2017.

Presiding: The Rt. Rev. Dr. S. Jebabanesan;

Chief Guest: Hon. R. Sampanthan, Leader of the Opposition.

Special Guest: Attorney Kanaha Manoharan of Canada

wo news items from India this week have parallels to Sri Lanka. First, the persecution watchdog Open Doors reported that Indian Christians experienced almost as many attacks in the first half of 2017 as in all of 2016. Second, Gurmeet Ram Rahim Singh, a self-styled guru was sentenced to 20 years in prison for the “custodial rape” of 2 underage followers by a judge who called him a wild beast. Investigations are pending on 40-50 complaints by other women. Riots by his followers resulted in 38 further deaths.

Are we Sri Lankans any better?

Attacks on Sri Lankan Churches

Attacks on Christians in Sri Lanka are well-documented. Cardinal Malcolm Ranjith’s surprising denial of such attacks (documented by attorney Lakshan Dias), added tongue-in-cheek (or perhaps foot-in-mouth) “I do not know whether fundamentalist Christian groups may have attempted to establish churches.” An assertion from a Christian leader that fundamentalist groups have no rights!

The Cardinal, recall, worked for the re-election of President Rajapakse and had his niece Ruwani Cooray appointed second secretary to our French Embassy without passing the required examinations. He also upset Tamil Catholics for urging the US government to go easy on soldiers who engaged in war crimes. Says a US Embassy Cable from WikiLeaks that the Archbishop told the US Ambassador, “pushing the government of Sri Lanka too hard on the war crimes accountability issue now could destabilize Sri Lankan democracy and could suffer revolution from the right or a coup by the military.”

The Cardinal and his opinions therefore deserve immediate dismissal. However, following his denial, then Minister of Justice and Buddhasasana Wijedasa Rajapaksa demanded a public apology from Lakshan Dias, threatening disbarment.  Dias fled the country and is reported to be abroad.

Read More

Expose`- Dealdasa went to Germany and then to Japan for secret discussions with Mahinda & Udayanga to topple govt.!

(Lanka-e-News - 01.Sep.2017, 4.25PM)   It is a well and widely known fact by now ,ex Minister of justice Wijedasa Rajapakse whose inglorious name was etched in the historical records of Sri Lanka’s  history as the worst betrayer  , traitor and corrupt scoundrel who trod this soil  , and therefore got thrown  out lock , stock and barrel most disgracefully . Now , it has also come to light while he was the minister of justice under the government of good governance  , he has been travelling  abroad meeting the notorious corrupt  Rajapakses and  their equally vile and vicious supporters , to hatch most secret conspiracies against the very government which appointed and pampered him as a minister, based on information passed by the foreign intelligence service to the leaders of the present government .

This conspiracy is most  grave and unlawful because,  some months ago Wijedasa who ostensibly went  to Germany , had subsequently gone to Japan from Germany and met Mahinda Rajapakse and Udaya Weeratunge a most wanted culprit in Sri Lanka (SL) against whom SL  court has issued an Interpol warrant for the arrest of Udayanga . Therefore a minister of justice while being in the government secretly meeting a criminal against whom there is an international warrant is itself a most heinous  crime .Wijedasa left for Germany while harboring Gnanassara  .  

While in Germany Wijedasa has met with crooked businessmen  who became  millionaires and billionaires through rackets and surreptitious activities during the period of Rajapakses. 

Wijedasa left Germany for Japan to meet Mahinda Rajapakse who was in Japan on a tour . He had met with Machiavellian Mahinda most secretly. Udaya Ranatunge the most wanted culprit in SL has also been met on that occasion by Wijedasa while he was still   the minister of justice  then. Little wonder the image of  the SL  judiciary of SL was tarnished beyond measure during the tenure of office of Wijedasa !

During the discussion the main points on which agreement was reached were : Mahinda shall extend support to make Wijedasa the common candidate  , and Gotabaya Rajapakse shall be made  prime minister. Under the 19 th amendment to the constitution, as Mahinda Rajapakse cannot field again as the presidential candidate, this agreement was reached. 

Mahinda -Wijedasa -Udayanga troika had also concluded that racial hatred and disturbances shall be stoked to topple the good governance government . This was why following the return from the German tour , Wijedasa was behaving like a demented individual unrelentingly making hate speeches arousing communal tension  .

Unfortunately for these traitorous rascals , the intelligence service of Germany a powerful country had communicated these conspiracies ,impending treacheries and villainies  to the president and the P.M.  However , before Wijedasa could take further action  in the evil and traitorous direction of his , the UNP Radical Tide which rose against Wijedasa the notorious turncoat , cutthroat betrayer and traitor of all times, gave him the treatment he richly deserved – threw him out lock ,stock and barrel before he could move any further on his conspiratorial moves. 

---------------------------
by     (2017-09-01 11:16:03)

We need to talk about that e-NIC project

D.A. JAYAMANNE on 09/01/2017

“The national identity scheme represents the worst of government”  said Theresa May, the then UK Home Minister. introducing a bill to scrap the national biometric ID scheme in the UK .  “It is intrusive and bullying, ineffective and expensive. It is an assault on individual liberty which does not promise a greater good.”  Mrs May’s record on civil liberties may be mixed, but in 2010 when the conservative-led government came into power, scrapping of the UK’s national ID scheme was one if it’s first order of business. Thus ended a robust debate over the national ID in Britain.

The scheme pitted the usual political foes and drew opposition from civil society groups and academia. The opponents argued the national ID threatens to fundamentally alter the relationship between the citizen and the State, an argument that ultimately held sway. The scheme lasted less than five years.

Unlike in the UK, Sri Lankans have long accepted their status with the State as some sort of gentrified cattle.  Introduction of a digital National Identity card — the e-NIC — doesn’t seem to significantly alter this relationship, even if this new scheme includes fingerprints, iris scans and other biometrics as well as a central database.

This is perhaps why that last week, when Minister of Internal Affairs S.B. Nawinna introduced the regulations for the soon-to-be-rolled out e-NIC, there was barely a whimper of opposition. Not from the mainstream media or civil society groups. Not from government’s own champions of civil liberties nor the joint opposition.  The event itself was a rather boring affair. The minister insisted that the current national ID is unsuitable for the times and the new e-NIC with its biometric and ‘family tree’ data  would improve efficiency of service delivery in government, ensure national security and contribute towards speeding up of economic development.

At first glance, the Minister’s remarks makes sense. The NIC that most of us carry around is based on ancient technology — a laminated card with a picture and some handwritten details. That interacting with the state day to day is painful is a fact of life that most Sri Lankans have come to accept. To prove one’s identity and related details, requires plenty of paperwork, filling lots of forms and going physically to a myriad different places. This is hardly the way we should be doing business two decades into the 21st century.




Image courtesy The Sunday Times

The e-NIC, we are told, is destined to change all that. In one incarnation, the e-NIC is part of the Household Transfer Management (HTM) System, where Samurdhi and other subsidy recipients will get their monies efficiently, preventing leakages and corruption. In another use case, it is expected to make tax collection easier, be the backbone of a National Payment Platform (NPP) and make mundane things like opening bank accounts painless. If you listen to proponents, e-NIC is the key to a to new Digital Sri Lanka with seamless service delivery enabled by merely your fingerprints and a centralized database of identity information.

If all that sounds too good to be true, it probably is.

There are a number of reasons to be skeptical.  First, most software systems in Sri Lanka including various government databases have long used the NIC number as a unique key in their databases. If improving service delivery is the goal, merely digitizing existing government data and establishing a protocol of sharing that information should be enough to bring about most conveniences. You do not need biometrics or additional information not present in your current NIC to make that happen.
Indeed many countries that have enabled high levels of digital service delivery have done so without a national database and biometrics. Where biometrics do exist currently — in my driving license for instance — it has failed to significantly improve the citizen experience. The necessity of a biometric digital ID forms  much smaller part of creating acceptable levels of digital service delivery than its proponents have you believe.

Quite apart from biometrics, there are the inherent risks of holding the nation’s entire identity information in a central database that is accessed by various government — and possibly private — entities.  The system immediately becomes a magnet for hackers. In the age of cyberwarfare and the usual sloppiness with which information security is treated by those in the Sri Lankan government, this should be a serious concern.

As a whole, the system opens itself up to all sorts of abuse by errant individuals or organized groups. Having access to people’s linked data on all activities the person has with the state, their family and perhaps bank details is a worrying amount of information that could be at few people’s disposal.
The e-NIC scheme is also easily converted into a system of mass surveillance that can be used to target dissidents, political opponents and others. All it requires is the right political moment and the wrong people in power.  This needless to say is an enduring risk in Sri Lanka.  Indeed the genesis of the e-NIC project lies in the national security state mentality of the conflict-era that has simply got a rebranding as a service efficiency project under the ‘Yahapalanaya’.

None of this is theoretical. In Pakistan, the NADRA database that enables the country’s national digital ID has gone through multiple hack attacks some of it apparently successful.  The program has also seen what can only be described as surveillance state innovation. The Pakistan Police now has NADRA enabled apps including ‘Hotel Eye’ – which tracks hotels and their guests, and  so called ‘predictive crime software’ that upon entering the Digital ID pulls out data such as family tree, ATM cards, call data, hotel bookings and location information.

Pakistan’s NADRA was the chosen supplier for Sri Lanka’s e-NIC scheme and completed the first phase of the project, before the present government called in for fresh tenders for phase two of the project.

India’s Aadhar scheme — the largest biometric digital ID project in the world — is more measured. Yet there have been widespread reports of misuse and exclusion. Tall tales of millions of rupees of savings from plugging welfare leakages  — a key argument for the introduction of Aadhar — remains unsubstantiated.  As the ambit of Aadhaar expands, some its earlier proponents have turned critics. Last week, the Indian Supreme Court threw new a spanner in the works by declaring the right to privacy to be a fundamental right, which some argue makes the current implementation of Aadhar untenable.

In Sri Lanka, It is the inadequacies of privacy and data protection laws that makes abuse even more likely. To be fair, many of the privacy issues pre-dates and exists independently of the e-NIC project. There is no doubt that digitization of data in  both private and public sectors will have to face up issues around privacy, data protection and information security.  But the e-NIC makes matters particularly urgent.

For one, the e-NIC enabling legislation  leaves open wide gaps that can be exploited to create a system of mass surveillance. The law allows the state to collect biometrics, family and unspecified ‘other’ information about citizens and store them in a central database called the “National Register of Persons” (NRP).  It also allows authorized persons to access this data on grounds of national security, ‘crime detection and prevention’ and doesn’t specify a clearcut consent architecture.

For all it’s faults, non-digitization and the ‘dumb NIC’ in our pockets safeguarded a valuable principle of citizen initiated identity verification. When you want to establish you are who claim you are, you produce the ID which is then verified against how you look. While imperfect, this preserved a measure of privacy and its own de facto consent architecture. With the e-NIC it makes it possible to perform “Card not Present’ data access and verification requests without the person’s explicit consent.

All of this is compounded by the fact that unlike in India, or Britain where there was a widespread debate on the surrounding issues, in Sri Lanka the biometric digital ID project is being carried out almost in indifference. Apart from a few op-eds scattered throughout the last 12 months or so, most Sri Lankans have been either unwilling or too unaware to engage on the issue.

It is partly due to the pressure from civic groups, the managing authority of Aadhar in India had to release copious amount of information, attend parliamentary hearings, release APIs and technical documentation.  Sri Lanka’s DRP however can get away with a single outdated web page on the project.

This means we still do not know the technical architecture of the e-NIC. How the data is stored, secured, shared and governed. We do not know who’s allowed to access the data or how privacy of individuals are protected and what safeguards we have to prevent surveillance of persons.
This is unacceptable.

Then there are the larger policy questions.  Does the e-NIC pass the cost-benefit test? We do not know because unlike in India’s Aadhar, benefits have not been articulated or hard numbers presented.  What model of privacy should Sri Lankans accept? Is it the the China model of ‘running naked’ to the state? Or one that emphasize individual privacy or somewhere in between? How much privacy do we have to sacrifice to gain acceptable levels of service delivery and national security? What laws need to be in place to address the challenges posed by technology adoption and digitization?
Some of these will have multiple complicated answers. Compromises will have to be made. But we should find a way to realize the promise of digital transformation in government and preserve personal liberty.  How do we go about it? Our current silence on e-NIC would not help us find answers.

The writer has a day job in technology and an interest in public policy.

University Teachers Group wants Public Commission on Education Reforms

Say support the call to end the MBBS programme at SAITM

2017-09-02 

As academics and activists, we are concerned about the Government’s plans for reform in the education sector. 

The report of the Subcommittee on Higher Education of the Sectoral Oversight Committee on Education and Human Resources Development (The Parliament of Sri Lanka, 2016) proposes SAITM as a model for expanding private medical education. It promotes ‘Public-Private Partnerships’ where public universities will support private medical establishments, particularly through infrastructure and personnel. 

The focus on SAITM has eclipsed the very great challenges facing us in the sphere of public education. These problems demand a systematic response. Ad hoc measures will be very destructive, and SAITM is such an ad hoc measure 

In order to initiate a dialogue and to highlight the dangers involved in such a move, we responded to the report of the Sub-Committee on Higher Education of the Sectoral Oversight Committee on Education and Human Resources Development. On August 21, we met with the Sub-Committee to express our concerns.

The Government’s plans for reforms in higher education and the proposal to support private education hinges on the fact that 82% of those who qualify for admission are shut out from universities.
They propose private, for-profit, fee-levying institutions to address this problem. For the vast majority of the 82% who will not be able to access private education, the Government proposes loan schemes and voucher systems. 

Numerous other ad hoc educational policies are being proposed and passed by the Cabinet without the consultation of the people of the country. Most recently, on August 22nd, the Cabinet approved the allocation of Rs. 2,700 million for a health insurance scheme for 4.5 million school children, proposed by the Minister of Education, once again without public consultation.

These educational reforms pose a serious threat to ‘free education.’
The focus on SAITM has eclipsed the very great challenges facing us in the sphere of public education. These problems demand a systematic response. Ad hoc measures will be very destructive, and SAITM is such an ad hoc measure. It, in no way, solves the larger problems of education, such as disparities in access to education based on wealth, regional differences, ethnicity and language.
It cannot address the resource problems that schools face, which prevent many students from pursuing their higher educational interests, or the struggles that universities face in offering educational programmes that fulfil the needs and aspirations of the public.

There is a crisis in Medical Education today. 

Students have been boycotting lectures for over six months now. As an immediate solution to the crisis in medical education, we support the call to end the MBBS programme at SAITM. We ask the Government to take immediate steps to commence this process and create the conditions for the return of students to State medical faculties; and halt all activities that expand the privatization agenda specified in the subcommittee report.

The crisis in education calls for a review of the system. We call for a PUBLIC COMMISSION that is committed to hearing what the people have to say undertaken through a consultative process.
The Government’s commitment to such a commission would be consistent with the principles of free education. A policy for education, developed through a truly representative process, with a commitment to uphold free education as a fundamental value, will further the process of democratizing education, something that we see as essential to the future of our peoples.

Signed: Dr. Harini Amarasuriya-Open University and University Teachers for Free Education, Geethika Dharmasinghe-Alliance for Economic Democracy, Dr.Ramya Kumar 0University of Jaffna and University Teachers for Free Education, Dr. Shamala Kumar, University of Peradeniya and University Teachers for Free Education, Dr. Athula Samarakoon, Open University, and University Teachers for Social Equity, Niyanthini Kadirgamar, Alliance for Economic Democracy, Anura Karunatileke, University of Kelaniya and University Teachers for Social Equity, Dr. Prabha Manuratne, University of Kelaniya and University Teachers for Free Education, D.W. Asela Rangadewa, Univ. of Visual and Performing Arts and University Teachers for Social Equity, Prof. Sumathy Sivamohan, University of Peradeniya and University Teachers for Free Education, Waradas Thiagarajah, University of Colombo and Education Renaissance Programme, Amali Wedagedera, Alliance for Economic Democracy, Upul Wickramasinghe, Education Renaissance Programme, Dileepa Witharana, Open University and University Teachers for Free Education. 

There will be a public meeting on Wednesday, September 13, on the theme WHAT PRICE PRIVATISATION OF EDUCATION at the Mahaweli Centre, Ananda Coomarasamy Road, Colombo 7, from 3-6 pm.

AG to request IGP to take action against PTL Chief Dealer

Treasury Bond issue:

Saturday, September 2, 2017 

The Attorney General’s Department will on Monday request the Inspector General of Police to conduct a criminal investigation against Perpetual Treasuries Limited Chief Dealer Nuwan Salgado for tampering with evidence submitted to the Presidential Commission of Inquiry investigating into the Treasury Bond issue.

It was revealed before the PCoI yesterday (31) that PTL Chief Dealer Nuwan Salgado has instructed the PTL IT Executive Sachit Devatantri to delete certain telephone conversations which were recorded in PTL’s call logger system.

Subsequently, Devathantri has deleted the recordings and replaced them with some other call recordings.

The PTL recently handed over all its telephone call recordings from February 01, 2015 to March 31, 2016 to the PCoI.

Testifying before the PCoI, PTL IT executive told that on the day following this deletion, the main voice logger computer of the telephone call recording system crashed and was replaced by another.

He said the call logger system was reinstalled as a result of the crash.

According to Devatatri he copied the tampered call recordings into the replaced computers while disregarding to copy the call information of these recordings, such as call time, duration and caller IDs.

The Attorney General’s Department has provisions to seek legal action against Salgado for tampering with and fabricating evidence, according to Section 24 of the Commission of Inquiry Act.