National Policies and Economic Affairs Deputy Minister Dr. Harsha De Silva A lamenting Deputy Minister Monday, 11 September 2017
Deputy Minister of Policy Planning and Economic Development Dr. Harsha de Silva in an emotion-filled intervention during a live television discussion program berated the whole administrative system of the country (available at: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H7XgAbIfq1o).
The proposed 20th Amendment to the Constitution is facing rough weather and it will have to be amended before getting the approval of the provincial councils. Some provincial councils have opposed it and the government plans to amend it and seek approval from those provincial councils. There is also some uncertainty with regard to the two-third majority in Parliament as a section of the Sri Lanka Freedom Party (SLFP) and the Tamil National Alliance (TNA) have already opposed this.
There is no doubt that a single-day election is more democratic than staggered elections. We have seen in the past how the entire power of the governing machinery could be used to ensure victory in a single province when the elections are held in isolation.
While there is an imperative need for electoral changes to make the system more democratic and representative, it is not pragmatic to pass such important amendments in a rush. Representation of women is also something that needs to be addressed. Although Sri Lanka produced the first woman Prime Minister more than five decades ago, the representation of women in Parliament is a mere 5% today.
Even the countries that gave voting rights to women long after us have increased the representation of women in their legislative bodies. Last week, in India, a female Defence Minister was appointed, breaking another glass ceiling. The Indian media hailed the decision to appoint Nirmala Sitharaman as Defence Minister. The government of Prime Minister Narendra Modi has an unprecedented six women in its Cabinet of 27 ministers, including two external affairs ministers, Sushma Swaraj and Defence Minister Nirmala Sitharaman, in the most powerful Cabinet Committee on Security (CCS). The other female ministers in the Cabinet are Maneka Gandhi, Smriti Irani, Uma Bharati, and Harsimrat Badal.
Representation of womenin elected bodies
Although Sri Lanka can be happy about the appointment of a female Minister of Justice recently, we cannot be complacent about the overall representation of women in elected bodies. While there are 12 female Members of Parliament, the ratio in the Provincial Councils, Pradeshiya Sabhas, and Urban and Town Councils is even less. One of the reasons could be the rapidly deteriorating political culture, but with proper electoral reforms, this could be rectified.
Any amendment should give priority to the need for a reasonable representation of women (who make up 50% of the population). The government needs to ensure that the general public don't get the impression that the primary objective of doing this is to postpone elections.
In a recent paper, activist Dr. Sujata Gamage listed some reasons as to why women have a hard time getting nominations for elections. She is of the opinion that creating a separate list for women would not solve the issue. If women are retained on the basis of votes received by each party (like the National List), women might not get the opportunity to contest in elections in constituencies because they have their own list.
The recently amended Local Government Elections Act would give 25% of the seats in a council to women through a list dedicated to women. There are alternative suggestions such as making the Proportional Representation List on a 50:50 ratio to ensure greater representation of female candidates. If such amendments are made, there will be no need for a separate women's list and hence no need to increase the size of the local authority by an additional 25% to accommodate women.
Gazette Notifications
Already, two gazette notifications have been issued with regard to 20A. The first gazette notification proposed the setting up of a Delimitation Commission to decide on new constituencies in order to implement the new electoral system comprising 60:40 ratio of election of members based on the basis of constituency under the first past the post and proportional representation on district basis respectively. Accordingly, it was proposed that the number of Members of Parliament should be increased to 237.
The second gazette notification proposed to hold the Provincial Council elections on a single day. This will result in the postponement of the Eastern, North Central, and Sabaragamuwa Provincial Council elections as these three provincial councils are due to complete their terms between 6 September and 1 October 2017. On 26 July, the Cabinet approved the proposal to amend relevant provisions in the Constitution and the Provincial Council Act to enable elections for all provincial councils to be held on the same day.
Mahinda Deshapriya
The Chairman of the Elections Commission, Mahinda Deshapriya earlier gave the assurance that he would issue the notification for the elections for the Eastern, North Central, and Sabaragamuwa Provincial Councils on the 2nd of next month. However, the proposed amendment says that, "section 10 of the Provincial Councils Elections Act, No. 2 of 1988 is hereby amended in subsection (1) of that section, by the substitution for the words and figures from "within one week" to "an election to such council," of the words and figures "within one week from the date specified in terms of Article 154DD of the Constitution, the Commissioner shall publish a notice of his intention to hold an election to all provincial councils." Hence, if the 20th Amendment is passed, elections for nine provincial councils cannot be held until the expiry of all the provincial councils. The last one elected was the Uva Provincial Council and its term will end in September 2019. If 20A becomes effective, the people in the Eastern, North Central, and Sabaragamuwa Provinces will have to wait for two more years.
Northern Provincial Council
The Northern Provincial Council opposed 20A and stated that it would be an infringement of the powers vested in provincial councils under the 13th Amendment. Eminent Constitutional Expert, Lal Wijenayake stated that 20A has not proposed any curtailment of provincial council powers. However, the fact remains that 20A would prevent people from deciding the fate of their respective provincial councils. The proposal states, "the election of members to all provincial councils shall be held on the same date and the Parliament shall determine the date on which all the provincial councils shall stand dissolved, provided that such a specified date shall not be later than the expiration of the term of the last constituted provincial council."
With all these diverse viewpoints, the question arises as to whether there is a need to rush these electoral reforms. If we are serious about a new Constitution, all these electoral reforms need to be incorporated into it. However, that should be done after a very careful study as the people do not want the new Constitution to be amended.
Two motorcycles were run-over and killed by a speeding jeep driven by Nenasiri Pragnaratne Sirisena, aka Lal Sirisena, a brother of the president, at dawn on September 09. Lal fled after the incident, later surrendered to police, and was remanded by the Polonnaruwa magistrate’s court.
The incident at Ethumalpitiya clamed the lives of two brothers – A.M.J. Jayaratne, a JVP activist who was to contest the upcoming local government polls, and A.M.J. Buddhadasa, a kidney patient. They had been returning after obtaining treatment for Buddhadasa around 1.30 am, when the incident occurred.
Lal drove the Landcruiser. Eyewitness accounts prevented another person from being presented as the driver, lankatruth website reported.
Lanka News Web tried to contact JVP leader Anura Kumara Dissanayake, and after several unsuccesful attempts, managed to get in touch with him. He said he was busy and that he would call back. That call did not come. Both the CID and the media ministry said they were unaware of such an incident. Until night, no mainstream media properly reported the incident that happened in the early hours of the morning.
What is going to happen is what happened in the past. This was the same policy when it came to the family of the former president. Police didn’t know, media ministry didn’t know.
President Maithripala Sirisena did not mediate. Lal was sent to Anuradhapura prison. Those who made calls did not open their mouths for their usual fear of the ‘HE’. If not for the JVP intervention, this could have been yet another unresolved road accident.
After Lal was arrested, top police officials telephoned the president and he told them, “Why are you asking me? Enforce the law irrespective of positions”, lankaenews reported. The question lies there. Why did the police telephone the president, instead of enforcing the law? To flex the law if the president told them to do so?
(Lanka-e-News- 11.Sep.2017, 10.30PM) When the court delivered the verdict and sentenced ex secretary of deposed people discarded president Mahinda Rajapakse to jail on grave charges of swindling colossal public funds which conferred illegal benefits on Machiavellian mendacious ex president and his presidential election campaign , the pro Rajapakse crooked groups without abiding by the laws and court verdict began distorting the actual picture and making false claims that those funds were spent on Sil cloth distribution , and this verdict of court was against Buddha dharma.
It is well to recall even before the presidential election in September 2014 , the Elections Commissioner had issued a dire warning against distribution of Sil cloths during the Uva provincial council elections. Herein is evidence which bears out that Lalith Weeratunge despite being a most responsible State officer behaved most irresponsibly and reprehensibly by not abiding by those instructions.
The secretary to the president being from the upper crust of the State administrative service is duty bound to obey those orders most strictly .Besides , it is to be noted the Elections Commissioner is not answerable to the president’s secretary under any circumstances. He had therefore during the Uva PC elections in September 2014 clearly and emphatically explained in writing that Sil cloth distribution to gain political advantage is unlawful.
The distribution took place on 2014-09-08 on Binara full moon poya day .The letter of warning (copy produced herein ) was sent by Mahinda Deshapriya the Elections Commissioner at that time to the Alliance secretary Susil Premajayanth, Dallas Alahaperuma and present president Maitripala Sirisena who was at that time the secretary of the SLFP. The media too publicized this. The letter read thus…
‘Distribution of dry rations as drought relief ; cash ; and food parcels constitute an abuse of state resources , and if Sil cloths are distributed out of state funds that too falls into the same category .Sil cloth distribution may be carried out via the private funds of an individual , but during the period of elections , if candidates or politicians come forward and distribute them displaying the name of the candidate or symbol , those are unlawful , and needs no reminding .’
Hence , the Elections Commissioner has thereby made it abundantly clear that Sil cloth distribution even out of private funds is unlawful . The Commissioner went on to further elaborate as follows :
‘Distribution of Sil cloths during a full moon Poya day in temples with political motives is tantamount to insulting Buddhism . At the same time , candidates who were not Buddhists becoming ‘Buddhists’, and candidates who have never stepped into a temple also participating in it is a most hilarious joke . I am in possession of audio and video tapes pertaining to these events,’ the Elections Commissioner highlighted.
In addition , he commented as follows :
‘If any individual or Institution goes to court staking any claims , it will become necessary for me to present this evidence in court . As these activities are election law violations , if the candidates are found guilty , even if they have won at the elections there are chances for them to be unseated.’ (The image of the full text of the letter of the Elections Commissioner is appended )
It is therefore very evident that it Is despite the Elections Commissioner pointing out extremely clearly in September 2014 that Sil robe distribution is unlawful and issuing a dire warning , ‘Weeratunges’ committed the same grave wrong at the presidential elections in 2015-01-08 recklessly and wantonly based on the foolish belief and hope that moribund Mahinda Rajapakses would win , and when that happens , whatever crimes Weeratunges committed will be suppressed , and he would escape punishment.
There is also another letter (copy published herein which can be read by magnifying the image ) that clearly substantiates the truth that Lalith Weeratunge authorized and encouraged corruption though he is trying to paint a picture he is an innocent soul , and is still an infant who knows only to cry over the soother taken out from his mouth , is in fact a scoundrel who deliberately committed wrongs ruthlessly , and which were absolutely detrimental to national interests.
Even when the Audit conducted an investigation into the funds of the BMICH that were siphoned off during the run up to the elections to conduct Dansalas in Temple trees , it was Lalith Weeratunge who ordered that letter of the Auditor General to the chairman of the BMICH , M.D.D.Peiris be immediately halted .
Therefore , all these exposures and evidence are clear pointers that Lalith Weeratunge is a downright crooked State officer who had wantonly and venomously allowed precious funds of the public to go down the drain though he is now pretending he was more sinned against than sinning.
The CaFFE organization, an election monitoring body during that time released photographs ( image appended ) which depicted not only Sil cloths but also clocks with Rajapakse’s photos that were distributed by Weeratunges and Pelpitas defrauding colossal public funds.
Hereunder is also a video footage giving thundering answers given to Bandula Gunawardena, tearing into shreds the stupid arguments advanced by the latter after visiting the convicts in prison. Bandula spoke in support of convicts Lalith and Anusha who are now enjoying the best of comforts and luxuries while in prison hospital even after swindling public funds on a monumental scale. It is well to recall , it is this same Bandula Gunawardena the perfect epitome of a most abhorred imbecile who muddled up the education sphere and thereby devastated the future of the country’s younger generation when he was the education minister
--------------------------- by (2017-09-11 17:08:08)
Deputy Minister Ranjan Ramanayake and six other civil society activists today requested the Health Ministry to transfer Acting Chief Medical Officer of Welikada Prison Nirmalie Thenuwara after she transferred former Secretary to the President, Lalith Weeratunga and former Director General of the Telecommunication Regulatory Commission, Anusha Palpita to the Prison hospital.
In a letter to the Secretary of the Ministry, they said the actions of the Acting CMO regarding the transfer of Weerathunga and Palpita soon after the entered prisons to the prison hospital was against procedure and highly problematic.
Deputy Minister Ranjan Ramanayake, Executive Director of CHR, Rajith Keerthi Tennakoon , Human rights lawyer and former IUSF convener Udul Premaratne , former Secretary of Nursing Officers' Association of the Colombo Remand Prison, Mahinda Kodagoda, Secretary of the Committee for Protecting Rights of Prisoners, Attorney at Law, Senaka Perera, Attorney at Law Namal Rajapakshe and journalist Kasun Pussawela are signatories of the letter.
They further state that when an individual, sentenced to rigorous imprisonment, arrives at the prison he or she is given a prisoner ID. Then the prisoner is sent to the medical center of the prison after his or her photograph is taken. However Thenuwara has met the two men before they were even issued a prisoner ID and transferred them to prison hospital.
"Such an incident has not taken place in Sri Lankan history. Because of the significant criticism leveled at this move the two men were not admitted to Prison Hospital but Thenuwara remained in prison hospital till 9 PM. However she reported for duty the following day before working hours and transferred prisoners V 18069 and V 18068 to the prison hospital. This is a gross violation of established procedure," the letter read.
After the Minister of Prison Reforms issued a directive stating that at least three doctors need to certify the health of a person before they are transferred to the prison hospital, Dr. Thenuwara has teamed up with three other Drs. Tirani, Sujeewa and Waruna Jayathilake to manipulate this directive.
"Dr. Thenuwara has received transfer orders to the Colombo National Hospital this year however this order has not been implemented due to the influence of a trade union and the mediation of an official, who is connected to South Asian Institute of Technology and Medicine (SAITM). Given her behaviour and her lack of qualifications to hold such a position, we ask you to transfer Dr. Thenuwara from the Prison Hospital," the statement read.
The former Secretary to the President Lalith Weeratunge and former TRC Director Genaral Anusha Pelpita
- Pic by Waruna Wanniarachchi
Monday, 11 September 2017
The recent decision finding the former Secretary to the President Lalith Weeratunge and Chairman of the Telecom Regulatory Commission and Director General of Telecom Anusha Pelpita guilty of criminal misappropriation of Rs. 600 million is extraordinarily significant. It is as significant as the court cases that upheld the Election Commissioner’s decisions regarding partisan TV broadcasts prior to the January 2015 Presidential Election.
This is about the misuse of public funds in the custody of the Telecommunications Regulatory Commission. I had the honour of serving as Director General of Telecommunications, the position that Mr. Pelpita occupied until 2015. I know well the law that created the fund from which Rs. 600 million was misappropriated, the Sri Lanka Telecommunications Act No. 25 of 1991 as amended by Act No. 27 of 1996. I have heard that concerns were expressed about the lack of controls on a fund under the control of an “independent” commission when the amendments were being discussed. We thought the safeguards were adequate, but we were proven wrong.
I taught regulation before I became Director General of Telecom in 1998. I just returned from teaching about regulation in Nay Pyi Taw, the capital of Myanmar. This particular case of flagrant abuse of regulatory independence is likely to be included in future teaching on the subject.
Section 22F(3) of the Act states: “There shall be paid out of the Fund of the Commission all such sums of money as may be required to defray any expenditure incurred by the Commission in the exercise and performance of its powers and duties.”
I could bore the living daylights out of my readers by listing out the powers and duties set out in Section 5 of the Act. Instead I will simply restate what the court held: the distribution of ‘silredi’ in the midst of an election campaign in violation of election laws does not fall within those powers and duties. The Act is online and available for anyone to peruse. Applicable law
The presidential candidate on whose behalf the criminal misappropriation had been done has sought to shift attention to what the misappropriated money was used for. That is disingenuous. The money in the fund can ONLY be used by the Commission for “the exercise and performance of its powers and duties” as set out in Section 5 of the Act. Use for any other purpose is a criminal act. The courts have so ruled. It is not for the former President or for me to say that spending money taken from telecom users on silredi for election campaigns is good or bad.
Prof. Nalin de Silva has written that the problem is with Roman Dutch Law. He is laughably wrong. The law that has been violated, the Sri Lanka Telecommunications Act, has nothing to do with Roman Dutch Law. It is a statute enacted in 1991 and amended in 1996 by a sovereign legislature under an autochthonous Constitution. Both principal political parties bear responsibility for the law.
The above individuals, a lawyer-politician and a prolific commentator on public affairs, may know the correct legal position but may be actively seeking to obfuscate the issues for self-preservation or other reasons. But it is worth asking what could be the underlying reason for them seeking to justify criminal misappropriation by making these arguments or at least thinking they have a chance of being accepted.
I have written previously that concepts of rule of law and constitutionality do not come naturally to us; that except for the period roughly demarcated by the Bracegirdle decision (1937) and the appointment of Sarath Nanda Silva as Chief Justice, our default culture has been that of Kandyan-era feudalism.
Within this mental framework, laws can be ignored at the behest of the King. Going against the wishes of the Sovereign is what is not acceptable and is liable to result in punishment. What government officials must understand
Even if our mindset is that of the Kandyan era, we must understand that it is the people who are now sovereign, not the temporary occupants of the positions of President, Prime Minister or Minister. Laws are the way the people’s wishes are communicated to officials. It is true that laws are made by Members of Parliament. But they do so as representatives of the people, not as appointees of the President or Prime Minister.
So even if we want to anchor our actions in Kandyan ways, we should act within the law. In the same way that King Sri Vikrama Rajasinha (1798-1815) reprimanded a senior official such as Ahalepola Adikaram for unlawfully taking the property of Elapatha Nilame or punished junior officials for neglecting their duty, today’s government officials are liable to be punished for acting outside the instructions given to them in the form of duly enacted laws by their present sovereigns, the people.
To violate election laws by using the people’s money to perpetuate a senior official’s tenure is to serve a power other than the legitimate sovereign, the people. The people’s money cannot be used to bribe or influence the voters. Such acts amount to treason, according to Kandyan law.
The sad truth is that the imprisoned officials were educated, intelligent people who should have known better; who should have known how to prevaricate and say no to the pretenders seeking to displace the people’s sovereignty. The tragedy of the Mahinda Rajapaksa decade was that too many people got sucked into the false narrative that the true sovereigns were a family and not the people.
Today, as in Kandyan times, the feudal lords who conspired against the sovereign enjoyed considerable latitude whereas punishment was prompt for the lower officials. One can only hope that justice will be meted out to those who gave the orders, not just to those whose signatures are on the documents.
Gamini Marapana PC, the lawyer representing Arjun Aloysius said today that he has advised his client not to testify before the Bond Commission.
Raising objections to the summoning of Aloysius, Marapana said that his client would be “self incriminating himself,” if he took the stand.
Marapana is the brother of current Foreign Minister Thilak Marapana who was forced to resign earlier following his conflict of interest with regard to the Avant Garde case.
Marapana is a close associate of Ranil Wickremesinghe and the cabal which perpetrated the scam.
Citing cases and the Presidential Commission Act, Marapana said that it was an established norm in Criminal Law that no accused will give witness against himself.
He further said that an accused does not need to provide documents which would incriminate himself, referring to the phone and laptops taken out of Aloysius’ possession.
However, Acting Solicitor General Dappula De Livera in response said that the Commission was one set to find fact and that no witness is an “accused”. He said that no person has been incriminated and as such criminal law principles do not apply in the Commissions proceedings.
Referring to the mandate and the warrant from which the Commission derives legality, De Livera said that it was clear that the Commission was not created to investigate persons – but an incident.
He said that the “wrongdoers must be identified”. He further said that the Act is very clear on the powers and functions of the Commission and as such Aloysius must be called to “ascertain the truth”.
He said both Arjun Aloysius and Arjuna Mahendran must be called to tell the country about the “robbery“.
De Livera taking a visible swipe at the fees the lawyers must be paid, twice said that Marapana “has justified his presence, although what he said has no relevance”.
De Livera said the “country wants both of them on the stand. This is matter of national importance and he must take the stand”.
The Commission said it will deliver an order on Wednesday. Marapana said that in the event the order was given against him, Aloysius should be given time to appeal.
Former Defence Secretary Gotabhaya Rajapaksa, former DIG Anura Senanayake, former Army commander Jagath Jayasuriya and several top ranking security establishment personnel would be summoned before the CID to obtain their statements with regard to the Welikada prison riot where 27 inmates were shot dead.
Police headquarters sources said the CID had already questioned and recorded statements from several top officers of the army and police with regard to the incident.
Regional Development Minister Field Marshal Sarath Fonseka recently told the media that former Army commander Jayasuriya was directly involved in the prison riot incident.
A riot broke out at the Welikada prison on Nov 11, 2012 with prisoners having armed themselves after breaking into an armoury there and several policemen including STF commandant were wounded when they attempted to bring the situation under control.
Last week some unidentified gunmen shot at the main witness in the prison riot case Suresh Nandimal’s house at Moratuwa.
Police headquarters sources said they would inform the former Defence Secretary and other top officials tomorrow to be present at the CID to give statements with regard to the Welikada prison riot.
As a collective of organizations and individuals who work on women’s human rights in Sri Lanka, we add our voices to the prevailing debate in public fora around legislation governing abortion. Recent announcements of the passage of a bill to legalize abortion under two circumstances - ‘when the mother carries a foetus with lethal congenital malformation and when a woman becomes a rape victim’1 were welcomed by many.We take the position this law is only a small and yet inadequate measure to ensure women are able to fully enjoy their human rights. Women’s rights, human rights defenders, lawyers and medical professionals have been campaigning for the complete decriminalization of abortion as a critical women’s rights issue in Sri Lanka for decades. We are now deeply concerned over the opposition to the passage of the proposed bill.
Currently, abortion is criminalized in Sri Lanka completely, unless it can be proven that it is necessary to save the life of the woman.2 This means women cannot access legal and safe abortions.
Around 700 abortions are performed daily in Sri Lanka3, which also accounts for the second leading cause of maternal deaths in 2006, 2008 and 20104. Criminalization of abortion has only driven the practice underground, with women resorting to illegal and often unsafe abortions5. The Country Profile on Universal Access to Sexual and Reproductive Health: Sri Lanka (2015)6 states, ‘Maternal death due to septic abortion is the third highest cause for maternal death, at 13% (FHB, 2012).’ It also states, ‘However, considering the...data, its legal status does not prevent women from seeking abortions, but does prevent women from seeking immediate medical assistance when complications occur... patients are brought in when the conditions are severe and are also at risk of being charged for procuring illegal abortions.’’
The CEDAW Committee also expressed concern that in Sri Lanka, abortion is still a punishable offence under the law, unless the purpose is to save the life of the mother, and expressed regrets that about 10 per cent of maternal mortality is reported as the direct result of clandestine abortion. In its Concluding Observations on the Eighth Periodic Report, the Committee reiterated its recommendation to the State to decriminalize abortion .
The continued criminalization of abortion is a crisis for women’s rights, women’s health and wellbeing in Sri Lanka; it is as a serious obstacle to our ability to make empowered and autonomous decisions as equal citizens. To choose the termination of an unwanted pregnancy, under any circumstances, is a fundamental human right.
We are concerned about the ‘religious’ and moralistic framework given to this debate by some opponents of decriminalization8. We assert that this is not a moral or religious matter, it is a matter of women’s human rights, dignity and choice. A response to this debate must be a response to women primarily, regardless of class, caste and circumstance. This call to legalize abortion is not a moral one - it is a position which centers the decision-making power of women, and sees the need to reform outdated, colonial legislation, so that women’s rights and autonomy can be enjoyed in full.
We will continue to campaign and work towards decriminalization of abortion unconditionally. At this juncture we support the cabinet’s decision to ease the existing laws criminalizing abortion and we ask the state not to be swayed in this decision.
1. We urge the government to promote, protect and fulfill all the rights of all women, and to fulfill its responsibility towards its citizens. Significant decisions such as this, with regards to citizens’ rights should not be influenced by religious or other institutions, in a secular and democratic state such as ours.
2. We urge the government strongly, to support the proposed amendments to existing abortion legislation and to continue to work with public health officials, women’s rights advocates, medical professions, and psychological-support experts to decriminalize abortion without limitation, and provide women the right and access to safe and legal abortion services.
3. We strongly urge the government to acknowledge every woman’s right to autonomously make decisions with regards to her own body, health and wellbeing -- physiological and emotional - unconditionally.
Signatories
1. Dabindu Collective
2. Hashtag Generation
3. Mannar Women's Development Federation
4. Suriya Women's Development Centre
5. Vallamai
6. Women and Media Collective
7. Women’s Education and Research Center (WERC)
8. Women in Need
9. Women's Action Network
10. Youth Advocacy Network, Sri Lanka
11. Anusha Alagarajah
12. Ermiza Tegal
13. Gameela Samarasinghe
14. Harini Amarasuriya, Open University of Sri Lanka
15. Hemalatha M.
16. Iromi Perera, Resercher
17. Jayanthi Kuru-Utumpala, Goodwill Ambassador for Women's Rights, Ministry of Women's Affairs
18. Jensila Majeed
19. Kamani Jinadasa
20. Kumudini Samuel, Women and Media Collective
21. Mahaluxmy Kurushanthan
22. Mythili B
23. Niventhini S.
24. Priya Mohan
25. Prof. Kumari Jayewardena
26. Radhika Guneratne
27. Rajani Rajeswary
28. Riyadh R.
29. Sachni Perera, Resurj
30. Sharmini V.
31. Sherine Xavier, The Social Architects.
32. Shermal Wijewardene
33. Shreen Saroor
34. Subha Wijesiriwardene, Women and Media Collective
3. Abeykoon A.T.P.L, Estimates of abortion rates in Sri Lanka using Bongaarets Model of Proximate Determinants of Fertility: 4-5.Abeykoon A.T.P.L, Estimates of abortion rates in Sri Lanka using Bongaarets Model of Proximate Determinants of Fertility: 4-5.
4.Family Health Bureau. National Maternal Mortality Reviews – 2011
Israel’s siege has all but killed Gaza’s once vibrant textile industry. Mohammed AsadMousa Tawfiq-11 September 2017
Khalil is being paid less now than he was 30 years ago.
During the 1980s, he used to travel from Gaza to work in the textile factories of Tel Aviv and Bir al-Saba, cities inside Israel. By sewing garments, he could earn 250 to 300 shekels per day.
Today, Khalil – not his real name – receives 50 shekels ($15) per day, an income shrunk considerably compared to three decades ago. Israeli restrictions mean that he is no longer able to travel outside Gaza for employment. Khalil is acutely aware that his wages are about one-tenth of what workers inside Israel receive for doing the same or broadly similar jobs.
“It’s really unfair,” the 48-year-old said. “I know that workers in Israel with half of my experience receive 400 to 500 shekels a day. This is discrimination and exploitation.”
Khalil added that he had “no choice” but to accept lower pay in Gaza than he had received in Israel.
“I have seven children, two of them are university students,” he said. “My wage isn’t enough but it’s better than nothing.”
Revival
Gaza’s textile industry is being revived after years of decline.
The siege, which Israel imposed on Gaza a decade ago, has been so severe that even cloth and thread were banned from being imported to the territory and sending clothes abroad was often impossible.
Recently, Israel has made an exception for textiles, while it still enforces restrictions on the flow of other goods into and out of Gaza.
Following a deal reached with local factory owners, Israel has allowed exports of clothing from Gaza to resume.
Economic factors may explain why textiles have been singled out for preferential treatment.
Negotiations leading to the deal “were not easy,” said Nihad Hamada, an accountant for garment traders in Gaza. “The Israeli side accepted our demands, simply because they will benefit from our products.”
Low wages are a major reason why clothes processed in Gaza have proven attractive to Israel, according to Hamada.
Proximity is another factor. Israeli businesses have lately outsourced some work to Gaza’s factories, rather than to distant China, a dominant player in the global textiles trade.
“Goods need 40 days to arrive from China but four days are enough for items to be processed in Gaza and sent to the Israeli side,” said Hamada.
“Israeli traders don’t have to pay in cash, they can pay by post-dated checks. And traders are forced to buy in big quantities from China but they can buy in very limited quantities from Gaza, which suits their needs more.”
Yet textile workers – particularly those old enough to remember better times – remain aggrieved that their wage levels have fallen.
As well as providing workers for Israel, Gaza used to have a vibrant textile industry of its own.
Before the second intifada broke out in 2000, Gaza played host to more than 900 garment factories. In total, they employed some 35,000 people. Most of their products were sold in Israel and the occupied West Bank.
The siege reduced the number of workers employed in Gaza’s garment trade to approximately 4,000. The number of garment factories fell to 150.
Mazen – not his real name – has been sewing clothes since 1998. While his father and uncles previously worked in Israel’s garment factories, he has only found employment within Gaza.
During his first two years in the trade, he was paid 100 shekels a day, roughly $25. Following the second intifada his wages have fallen significantly.
“I learned the craft from my father,” he said. “It’s our family’s work. A few kilometers away from Gaza, there are people [inside Israel] who aren’t as skillful as us and they don’t work as much as we do. But they receive wages 10 times more than ours. It’s unfair.”
Israel’s siege has forced factory owners to cut costs, including wages. “The worker is the weakest link,” said Sami al-Amassi, who heads the General Federation of Trade Unions in Gaza.
“With more than 220,000 unemployed workers, the situation is very difficult,” he added. “When a worker finds a job, even with a low salary, they won’t complain because they know that tens of thousands are waiting for such an opportunity.”
The precise nature of the trade between Gaza and Israel is kept secret. Gaza factory owners contacted for this article refused to name any of their Israeli clients.
Tayseer al-Austath, a factory owner who heads the Palestinian Federation of Garment, Textile and Leather Industries, said the value of garment exports from Gaza to Israel and the West Bank rose from $1.5 million in 2015 to more than $3 million last year. For the first six months of this year, such exports have been worth $2 million.
“They hate us”
Despite that increase, Gaza’s traders still have to overcome many hurdles.
“All over the world, businessmen move freely,” al-Austath said. “I think that 60 percent of our job is about being in direct contact with our clients. We face a lot of problems in collecting money from clients.”
The current power crisis in Gaza has also badly affected the textile sector – by pushing up its costs.
When Gaza has an uninterrupted supply of power, al-Austath pays an electricity bill for his plant in Gaza City of $850 per month. Now that Gaza has been forced to get by on less than three hours of electricity a day, he has to spend an extra $1,400 per month on fuel for a generator.
Al-Austath argues that Israel has a deliberate policy of preventing Gaza from nurturing its own industries. “They hate us because we work hard and build our country,” he said.
Scholar Toufic Haddad noted that the Israeli economy has generally become less reliant on cheap Palestinian labor. Palestinians in the West Bank and Gaza have been frequently blocked from working inside Israel since the 1990s.
Haddad, author of the book Palestine Ltd: Neoliberalism and Nationalism in the Occupied Territory, said that the 1993 Oslo accords theoretically allow Israel to avail itself of Palestinian labor in a profitable way. Only limited use has been made of such labor, however, because of the “overriding political instability,” he said.
If Israel really wishes to develop a new economic model based on exploiting Palestinians, Haddad added, “there is nothing stopping it making much more serious maneuvers to promote this strategy, starting with permitting free movement and access” for Palestinian workers.
A French-Lebanese filmmaker was released by Beirut authorities on Monday after being detained over a film he partly shot in Israel.
Ziad Doueiri was returning from the Venice film festival where the star of his latest film, The Insult, won the prize for best acting.
He appeared in a military court on Monday after being detained on Sunday evening upon arrival at the Beirut airport, and having both passports confiscated.
"I am profoundly hurt. I came back to Lebanon with a prize from Venice,” the director told AFP on Sunday night.
I am profoundly hurt. I came back to Lebanon with a prize from Venice
- Ziad Doueiri, French-Lebanese film director
“The Lebanese police have authorised the broadcast of my film (The Insult). I have no idea who is responsible for what has happened," the director said.
Lebanon has chosen his latest film as its official entry for the foreign film category at the Oscars.
Doueiri was questioned for over four hours at a military tribunal hearing and finally released without charges.
His lawyer told reporters outside the court that the case was "definitively closed”.
"My client was released. No charges have been filed against him," Najib Lyan said.
Entering enemy territory
However, a judicial source told AFP "it is possible that the issue will be referred to a military court, for the crime of entering an enemy country without prior authorisation".
Doueiri’s 2013 movie The Attack was partly filmed in Israel.
The film, based on a book by Algerian author Yasmina Khadra tells the story of a Palestinian doctor in Tel Aviv who tries to understand why his wife commits a suicide attack.
Lebanon does not recognise the state of Israel and the two countries have been officially at war since 1948. Relations between Lebanese citizens and Israel are illegal.
“To set things straight, I did shoot part of the film in Tel Aviv because this is where part of the story takes place. I used Israeli actors because also these were the artistic choices that I have made. And I have no regret and no apologies whatsoever,” Doueri told the local press back in 2013.
“He was accused of having breached article 285 of the Lebanese penal code prohibiting any visit to an enemy territory,” his lawyer told local media on Monday.
Article 285 of the Lebanese penal code stipulates that any Lebanese citizens or residents of Lebanon who enters or tries to enter “enemy territory” or, takes part in any business relationship with a citizen of the “enemy territory” faces up to a year in prison.
UNIFIL peacekeepers patrol the border zone between Israel and Lebanon, still technically at war (AFP)
Yet, freedom of speech activists in Lebanon are not convinced by this explanation.
“The position of the Lebanese authorities is not clear. On the one hand, the minister of culture supports the movie - he was in Venice with Doueiri, and the government is supporting Doueiri as the official Lebanese candidate in the Oscars, yet on the other hand you have another state body arresting him.
“We are not questioning the law but the way it is applied,” Mhanna added.
Doueiri’s movie The Attack was never released in Lebanon. The state of relations between the two enemy states implies a strict censorship policy from the Lebanese authorities towards any Israel-related production.
A couple of months ago, the American blockbuster Wonder Woman was banned from Lebanese theatres because the main actress, Gal Galot, is Israeli. Other movies prohibited for the similar reasons include Waltz with Bachir.
In both these cases, the ban had little impact on the movie’s international success and Lebanese citizens could still view them online.
Impact on local arts scene?
But activists warn that such arrests could have a long-term negative impact on the local arts scene.
“When censorship targets big international productions, the impact is minimal. People can still watch the movie on the Internet and it doesn’t affect the artists’ careers,” said Gino Raidy, blogger and vice-president of MARCH, an NGO which is setting up an online museum of censorship.
But, he added, “when censorship happens at a local level though, it takes the form of intimidation and the result is often self-censorship.
“Lebanese artists won’t even try to tell difficult stories anymore because if it gets banned they won’t even get their investment back. In the case of Israel, it is already a topic artists refuse to touch on.
Lebanese artists won’t even try to tell difficult stories anymore because if it gets banned they won’t even get their investment back
- Gino Raidy, Lebanese blogger and anti-censorship activist
“Ziad Doueiri was one of the only ones tackling the matter,” he added.
Doueiri’s arrest also sheds light on another dark spot in the Lebanese legal system, activists say, as he was brought in front of a military court and not a regular tribunal.
“Regardless of the charges being brought up, Doueiri should not be tried in a military court,” said Bassam Khawaja, Lebanon researcher at Human Rights Watch.
“Unfortunately, military courts are still used in Lebanon to try civilians on a broad range of charges, in violation of their due process rights and international law. These trials largely take place behind closed doors, with limited grounds for appeal, and it's difficult to see how he would get a fair trial there.”
In January, Human Rights Watch released a report denouncing the use of military courts against civilians including activists and children. The report claims that in 2016 alone, 355 children were tried before military courts.
Deputy Minister of Policy Planning and Economic Development Dr. Harsha de Silva in an emotion-filled intervention during a live television discussion program berated the whole administrative system of the country (available at: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H7XgAbIfq1o).
UNIFIL peacekeepers patrol the border zone between Israel and Lebanon, still technically at war (AFP)