Congress Weighs Threat of Moscow Wielding the Energy Weapon

The “mere threat of a cutoff gives Russia political leverage” over Europe.

Vladimir Putin and Gazprom CEO Alexei Miller examine a map of the Nord Stream gas project outside Vyborg, Russia on Sept. 6, 2011. (Alexey Nikolsky/AFP/Getty Images) 

BY KEITH JOHNSON, ROBBIE GRAMER-DECEMBER 12, 2017, 8:27 AM

The Donald Trump administration has taken a soft line on Russia in many areas of contention, except when it comes to Moscow’s use of energy exports as a geopolitical cudgel.
Top administration officials, including Secretary of State Rex Tillerson, are sounding the alarm about the threat posed by Russia’s use of the energy weapon, especially a controversial $11 billion gas pipeline project led by largely state-owned Gazprom that they fear will tear Europe apart and leave Ukraine in the cold.

On Tuesday, the Senate Foreign Relations Committee will hear testimony from a pair of senior State Department officials on “coercive Russian diplomacy” and the threat it poses to the United States.
Europeans and Americans have fretted for years about Moscow’s tendency to use its energy exports as a weapon to cow neighbors in Europe; several times, Russia has cut off supplies of natural gas to punish wayward states, especially in Central and Eastern Europe. But those worries have been given fresh urgency with Russia’s plan to build a new pipeline alongside an existing gas pipeline across the Baltic Sea to Germany, known as Nord Stream 2.

“Even if Gazprom takes no actions to exert political power through energy trade, the fact that it has the means to do so, the mere threat of a cutoff, gives Russia political leverage,” said Meghan O’Sullivan, a former George W. Bush administration official who is now director of the Geopolitics of Energy project at Harvard University’s Kennedy School.

Russia says the project is purely commercial and is meant to provide more cheap gas to Europe as it seeks cleaner-burning fuels to replace coal.

Tillerson specifically called out Russia’s use of the “energy weapon” in a speech in late November, warning that the new pipeline would be “unwise” and leave Europe more reliant on a single supplier.
U.S. officials have become increasingly vocal about Nord Stream 2 because, if it is built as planned, the increased capacity would mean Russian gas would no longer need to cross Ukraine to get to Europe. That would take away a huge source of revenue for cash-strapped Kiev just as the war-torn country is trying to get its economy back on track. And losing that valuable transit business would make it harder for Ukraine to clean up and privatize parts of its energy sector, where corruption has been rife.

If that reform stalls, Ukrainian officials warn, the country will slip back closer to Moscow’s orbit.
“The anti-corruption fight is the key thing to achieve for our country,” said Andriy Kobolyev, the chief executive of Ukraine’s state-owned Naftogaz, in an interview. Corruption, he said, is a bigger threat to Ukraine’s future than Russian tanks.

Naftogaz, which makes up 16 percent of Ukraine’s total budget revenue according to Kobolyev, had an anti-corruption showdown when members of its independent supervisory board resigned in September, citing government obstruction and political meddling in its reform efforts.
Kobolyev described Nord Stream 2 as a geopolitical wedge meant to sow divisions between Western and Eastern Europe, part of broader Russian efforts to undermine European unity.

The consortium of five European energy firms and Gazprom building Nord Stream 2 says that the project will not cut out Ukraine and is badly needed to meet future gas demand in Europe.
Additionally, the consortium says, gas sent to Europe by pipeline would be cheaper than liquefied natural gas (LNG) from the United States sent on tankers, making the pipeline beneficial to Europe’s economy.

“The notion that Nord Stream 2 will directly harm Ukraine or result in the termination of Ukrainian gas supply routes is false,” said Jens Müller, a spokesperson for Nord Stream 2.
“Neither LNG nor gas transited through Ukraine alone are sufficient to secure Europe’s energy needs,” he added. Another pipeline across the Baltic is “imperative for the future of the EU energy supply.”

Many policymakers in Germany, where there is plenty of support for the project, would agree. German Social Democrats, who could be part of a grand political coalition, are particularly supportive.

And to the pipeline’s supporters in Berlin, U.S. opposition to it smacks of economic self-interest.
“In Germany, there are certainly people that think this administration’s opposition to Nord Stream 2 is an obvious example of Trump using foreign policy to promote U.S. economic interests,” said Ellen Scholl of the Atlantic Council.

U.S. administration officials acknowledge as much. While the United States during the Barack Obama administration was a vocal critic of Russia’s pipeline plans, including Nord Stream 2, and another project in Turkey, the Trump administration has ratcheted up the criticism. The energy boom in recent years, fueled by the fracking revolution and especially the first U.S. exports of natural gas to Europe this year, have made U.S. officials even more willing to use energy as a diplomatic tool to counter Moscow’s influence.

“The bottom line is that the strength of the U.S. energy sector impacts how we approach foreign affairs,” said John McCarrick, the No. 2 energy official at the State Department, in a November speech.

The first cargoes of U.S. natural gas arrived in Lithuania and Poland this summer, and Poland has signed a five-year deal to get more U.S. gas. Increasingly, U.S. natural gas is heading to Europe, where it can compete directly with Russian energy. Those new import terminals have allowed countries like Poland and Lithuania, long almost wholly reliant on Russia for energy, to “partially wean themselves” from Moscow, McCarrick said.

Gas exports offer triple benefits for the Trump administration, he added, helping to open markets, increasing U.S. exports, and bolstering American allies.

In the meantime, Nord Stream 2 is plunging ahead, and the consortium has just finalized all the contracts it needs to start construction next year. The risks it now faces are political.

The European Union wants to apply internal market regulations to the offshore pipeline, which could scupper the project. Russian Prime Minister Dmitry Medvedev said the expansive EU approach seems like an effort to get Moscow to abandon the project. Meanwhile, Denmark could upset the pipeline’s construction by forcing it to take a new route across the Baltic, adding time and expense.

But the biggest risk to Russia’s pipeline plans comes from the U.S. Congress. Legislation passed in July expands the range of economic sanctions that could be levied on Russian energy firms — even on projects outside of Russia. That has put Nord Stream 2 in the crosshairs. If the sanctions are ever enacted by the president, it could be enough to derail the project if EU red tape doesn’t first.

“It would not be too difficult for the United States to throw a spanner into Nord Stream 2 by making the project risky and the financing therefore too expensive,” O’Sullivan said. But she cautioned that a political sledgehammer, such as fresh sanctions, would probably be less effective than letting the invisible hand work, by making it even easier to export U.S. energy to countries that want it.
“If the United States wants to curb Russian influence, it can probably do few things more effective than just letting energy markets work,” she said.

Still, the prospect of additional U.S. sanctions is already a headache for Nord Stream 2. The pipeline consortium is “meeting every month to see if sanctions are there or not,” said Kobolyev.

The only question the project’s European backers are weighing, he said, is “how much is the U.S. against this project?”

Indonesia is brightest hope for democracy in Asean say parliamentarians, experts

Villagers wave the national flag during celebrations for the 72nd anniversary of the Indonesia military, in Cilegon, Indonesia Banten province, October 5, 2017. Source: Reuters/Beawiharta

By Max Walden | 12th December 2017

THE OUTLOOK for democracy and human rights in Southeast Asia is “bleak” with the world’s largest Muslim-majority country Indonesia offering the best hope for democratic progress in the region, parliamentarians, academics and rights activists from across the region have warned.

Indonesia is brightest hope for democracy in Asean say parliamentarians, experts.docx by Thavam on Scribd

UN urges immediate evacuation of 137 Syrian children

Many children in Eastern Ghouta are suffering from acute malnutrition [Linda Tom/OCHA]

10 Dec 2017

The UN children's agency has called for the immediate evacuation of scores of sick Syrian children from a besieged rebel-held enclave on the outskirts of Damascus, amid continued violence.

Five children in Eastern Ghouta have reportedly died, while 137 others require immediate medical assistance, UNICEF said in a statement on Sunday.

The children, aged seven months to 17 years, are unable to access medical help for conditions ranging from kidney failure and severe malnutrition to wounds sustained from conflict.

"The situation is getting worse day by day," said Fran Equiza, UNICEF's representative in Syria.

"The health system is crumbling and schools have now been closed for almost a month. Sick children desperately need medical evacuation and many thousands more are being denied the chance of a normal, peaceful childhood."

Eastern Ghouta, 15 km from Syria's capital, has been surrounded by government forces for four years, with the siege escalating in recent months.

The estimated 400,000 people living there have been almost completely cut off from humanitarian assistance since 2013, according to UNICEF.

Nearly 12 percent of children under five in Eastern Ghouta suffer from acute malnutrition, the highest rate recorded since the start of the Syrian conflict in 2011.

In a previous report, UNICEF said the rapidly increasing costs of basic foods and cooking supplies in Eastern Ghouta, where bread costs more than 85 times its price in Damascus, have made preparing a meal extremely difficult for most residents.

UNICEF workers, on the most recent UN inter-agency convoy to Nashabieh town in Eastern Ghouta, described "one of the worst health and nutrition situations since the conflict began in Syria".

In Sunday's statement, UNICEF reiterated its call for "unimpeded, unconditional and sustained humanitarian access" to children across Syria.

"Now is the time for all sides to do the right thing and to stop the violence," said Equiza.

Also on Sunday, the Syrian government's representatives returned, after more than a week in the Swiss city of Geneva, where the latest round of UN-sponsored talks is underway.

The discussions focus on Security Council Resolution 2254, which calls for a transitional government followed by elections.

Held for the eighth time, the talks are due to end on December 15.

Sleeping rough in Britain more than doubled since 2010

By Paul McNamara-11 DEC 2017

As Britain freezes so too do the thousands sleeping rough in towns and cities across the country, Whilst the majority of us worry about staying warm, for those on the streets the priority is staying alive in sub-zero temperatures.

Can a GM banana solve Uganda's hunger crisis?

A law paving the way for GM crops is aimed at tackling the acute food shortages faced by almost 11 million Ugandans, despite experts’ fears over the technology



Trials for a GM banana variety, which is resistant to wilt and contains vitamin A, have been ongoing since 2004 in an effort to improve production. Photograph: Daniel Kaesler/Getty Images/EyeEm

 Market day at a trading post, Fort Portal area, Uganda Photograph: Robertharding/Rex/Shutterstock


Alon Mwesigwa in Wakiso-Tuesday 12 December 2017 12.20 GMT

After an afternoon drizzle, Ephraim Muhereza carefully scouts his three-acre banana plantation in Gayaza, Wakiso district, plucking male buds from trees. This will stop his plants from catching the notorious banana bacterial wilt, which has destroyed many farms in Uganda.

“We have been told that to reduce the spread of the wilt. We have to cut them so that bees that visit them don’t spread the disease,” he says.

But the introduction of a law in October could solve the problem for Muhereza and his fellow farmers. After five years of deadlock, parliament passed the national biotechnology and biosafety bill (pdf), paving the way for the cultivation of genetically modified crops in Uganda.

Trials for a GM banana variety, which is resistant to wilt and contains vitamin A, have been ongoing since 2004 in an effort to improve production. The law will mean this crop can be released to the public.

The new measures also provide safety guidelines and call for a committee to approve any company that wants to plant or sell GM seeds in Uganda. The national varieties committee will monitor scientists and has to approve technologies before they are released to the public.

Egypt, Sudan and South Africa have already allowed GM crop cultivation in Africa.

“Now that the law has been passed, we’re able to go for open-field trials [of the technologies] before releasing them to the public,” says Priver Namanya Bwesigye, a plant biotechnologist at the National Agricultural Research Organisation. She adds that GM bananas could be released for public use in 2021.

Other GM trials include developing cassava resistant to brown streak, drought-resistant maize and bollworm-resistant cotton.

But not everyone is happy. Agriculture experts meeting in Kampala in August concluded that Uganda was not ready for GM crops.

Lilian Anguparu, the general manager of Amfri Farms Limited, which produces and exports organically certified products, says: “Trying out a system whose aftermath we even do not know is something very risky … in my view, GMOs are not the right way to go.”

Critics say GM crops will make farmers beholden to big agribusiness by having to buy seeds every season. Farmers in Uganda produce between 80% and 85% of their own seeds (pdf), saving some of their harvest as seed for the next planting season.

“Farmers will still be free to grow their indigenous seeds and save them for another season if they want,” Bwesigye says. “But the yield won’t be enough to ensure food security or [a good] income.”
Prof Ogenga Latigo, an MP and champion of biotechnologies, says there have been numerous attempts to scare people about GM crops. Writing in the Uganda Observer recently, he said: “The scaremongering is, however, essentially unjustified and absolutely unjustifiable in science, facts and realities.”

He says there is little difference between GM crops and those grown conventionally. “The only difference now is that crops modified through the process of genetic engineering or biotechnology are called GMOs, and are feared and demonised, whereas all the other crops that are also genetically modified using conventional breeding methods – they are now called non-GMOs, are not feared or demonised, and are easily accepted.”

In January, an assessment of national food security concluded that 10.9 millionUgandans were experiencing acute food insecurity, due to climate change, pests and diseases.


Market day at a trading post, Fort Portal area, Uganda Photograph: Robertharding/Rex/Shutterstock

The new technologies are expected to tackle food shortages and the problem of malnutrition. About 30% of Ugandans are said to eat food that lacks nutritional value, according to the 2017 national household survey (pdf).

Scientists say the GM banana will fight vitamin A deficiency. In Uganda, on average, 30% of people do not get enough of this vitamin, Bwesigye says: the World Health Organization classifies the situation as grave if 15% of the population is deficient.

“[Malnutrition] is rampant in communities feeding a lot on staple [crops],” she says. “We are addressing communities feeding on these bananas every day.” She says the culture in Uganda is still for people to feed on staples and little else, rather than having a more varied diet that includes vegetables.

Uganda is a signatory to the Cartagena protocol on biosafety (pdf), which aims to ensure the safe transfer, handling and use of organisms resulting from biotechnology. But such protocols may still not be enough to silence the critics of GM crops.

'Ground-breaking' new drug gives hope in Huntington's disease

A DNA double helix is seen in an undated artist's illustration released by the National Human Genome Research Institute to Reuters on May 15, 2012. REUTERS/National Human Genome Research Institute/Handout

Ben Hirschler-DECEMBER 11, 2017

LONDON (Reuters) - Scientists have for the first time fixed a protein defect that causes Huntington’s disease by injecting a drug from Ionis Pharmaceuticals into the spine, offering new hope for patients with the devastating genetic disease.

The success in the early-stage clinical trial has prompted Roche to exercise its option to license the product, called IONIS-HTT(Rx), at a cost of $45 million.

SPONSORED

Lead researcher Sarah Tabrizi, professor of clinical neurology at University College London, said the ability of the drug to tackle the underlying cause of Huntington’s by lowering levels of a toxic protein was “ground-breaking”.

“The key now is to move quickly to a larger trial to test whether IONIS-HTT(Rx) slows disease progression,” she said in a statement on Monday.

Ionis senior vice president of research Frank Bennett said the protein reductions observed in the study “substantially exceeded our expectations” and that the drug was also well tolerated.

However, experts cautioned that the results were still early and the ability of the new medicine to improve clinical outcomes for patients had yet to be demonstrated.

“The question is whether this is enough to make a difference to patients and their clinical course, and for that we will have to wait for bigger trials,” said Roger Barker of the University of Cambridge, who was also involved in the research.

Huntington’s is a progressive neurodegenerative disease affecting mental abilities and physical control that normally hits sufferers between the ages of 30 and 50 years before continually worsening over a 10- to 25-year period.

There is currently no effective disease-modifying treatment for the condition, with existing medicines focused only on managing disease symptoms.

Ionis said Roche would now be responsible for all IONIS-HTT(Rx) development, regulatory and commercialization activities and costs.

The drug uses an approach called antisense to stop a gene producing a particular protein. The technique has already led to a drug for spinal muscular atrophy that was approved last year.

Shares in Ionis rose around 2 percent in early Nasdaq trade as did those in Wave Life Sciences, which is also working on antisense medicine.

Sri Lankan army detains Tamil journalists documenting Sinhalisation in Mullaitivu

10 Dec  2017

Eight Tamil journalists gathering research on Sinhalisation in Mullaitivu were detained by Sri Lankan soldiers and police on Saturday.

The journalists were questioned about their identities by a soldier who approached them on a bicycle. When told that they had come from Jaffna, the soldier left and returned with another solider who detained and questioned them further.

Despite identifying the journalists, the soldiers detained them for over half an hour and called the police to the scene.

The police officers arrived in plain-clothes and failed to produce any police identification but seized the group’s cameras and equipments, handing them over to the soldiers who proceeded to delete all photos and videos that the journalists had worked on in the area.

The journalists had their identities and vehicle registration numbers recorded and were photographed by the soldiers.

Sinhalisation in Mullaitivu

The journalists were questioned and detained while researching the Sinhalisation of Thanneer Murippu in Mullaitivu.

Sinhalese fishermen had been denied permits to fish in the Thanneer Murippu tank by the Mullaitivu District Secretariat.

However Tamil residents in the area had complained that the Sinhalese fishermen were illegally fishing the tank with the protection of Sri Lankan soldiers, with plans even underway for a new army checkpoint on the banks of the tank.

The journalists said that all their documentation of the issue which was a source of anxiety and anger for the Tamil locals had been deleted when the soldiers erased their cameras.

Related Articles: 

18 July 2017 : Tamil journalist harassed by Sri Lankan soldiers en route to disappearances protest

18 July 2017 : Tamil journalist interrogated for 3 hours by CID and pressured to sign statement in Sinhalese

30 March 2017 : Tamil journalists threatened by Sri Lankan soldiers

Human Rights: UDHR celebrates its 69th year

The concept and mechanisms of human rights were institutionalised and internationalised only after the birth of the United Nations. Human Rights are interdependent and based on freedom, dignity, equality and justice.

by S. V. Kirubaharan- Dec 11, 2017

“Everyone is entitled to all the rights and freedoms set forth in this Declaration, without distinction of any kind, such as race, colour, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, property, birth or other status.

Furthermore, no distinction shall be made on the basis of the political, jurisdictional or international status of the country or territory to which a person belongs, whether it be independent, trust, non-self-governing or under any other limitation of sovereignty”. – Article 2 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights – UDHR.

( December 11, 2017, Paris, Sri Lanka Guardian) Many agree that the concept of human rights was not born in the West. They trace its origin in ancient Greece and Rome. However, the “Cyrus Charter of Human Rights” was discovered in 1878 during the excavation of the site of Babylon. Many historians have considered this as the first declaration of human rights.

On 4 October 539 BC, Iranian (Persian) soldiers entered Babylon then the capital of Iraq (Babylonia). It was said that this bloodless war freed all the captive nationalities held as slaves for generations in Babylon. On 9 November Cyrus of Iran (Persia) visited Babylon and issued a declaration, inscribed on a baked clay barrel (cylinder), known as “the Cyrus Charter of Human Rights”. Even today, one can see this in the British Museum in London, UK.

However, the concept and mechanisms of human rights were institutionalised and internationalised only after the birth of the United Nations. Human Rights are interdependent and based on freedom, dignity, equality and justice.

Generally, Human Rights guarantee freedom, dignity, equality and justice for everyone irrespective of age, sex, race, ethnicity, religion, nationality and any regional differences.

The United Nations Charter was signed on 26 June 1945 by 50 countries in a UN conference in San Francisco. But the UN officially came into existence only on 24 October 1945 when all five major powers – France, United Kingdom, USA, USSR (Today Russia) and China (Today Republic of China or Taiwan) ratified the Charter. To commemorate this occasion, 24 October is United Nations Day.

Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR)

At its first session in 1946, the Commission on Human Rights – CHR was given a mandate to draft a declaration. An eight-member drafting committee drafted the Universal Declaration of Human Rights – UDHR. It was adopted on 10th December 1948 in the UN General Assembly sitting at the Palais de Chaillot in Paris. This day is celebrated all over the world as “International Human Rights Day”.

There are thirty articles set forth in the UDHR – article 1 (one) lays down the philosophical claim upon which the UDHR is based, article 2 (two) emphasises that human beings are born free in equal dignity and are entitled to all rights and freedoms set out in the UDHR without any kind of discrimination such as on grounds of race, colour, sex, language, religion, social, political or other opinion.

The following nineteen articles, 3 to 21 deal with the civil and political rights to which all human beings are entitled. The next six articles, articles 22 to 27 deal with economic, social and cultural rights and the concluding articles, article 28 and 29 recognise that everyone is entitled to social and international order in which human rights and fundamental freedoms can be fully realised,  stressing the duties and responsibility which the individual owes in a democratic society. The final article 30 – gives cautionary notice that nothing in the UDHR may be interpreted as implying that any group or person has any right to do anything aimed at destroying the rights and freedoms set forth in the UDHR.

Even though the UDHR is not legally binding on member states, it is considered as having the value of customary international law since the main principles of UDHR are highly respected by all States. Also it is used for measuring the respect that states have for human rights.

In July 1997 when the fiftieth anniversary of UDHR was in celebration, one of the UN member states Malaysia, called for a review of the UDHR, claiming that the document was outdated.  Malaysia further stated that when the UDHR was adopted by the UN, there were only 58 members’ states and this figure had since tripled.

While UDHR was in progress, the CHR was drafting two legally-binding covenants on human rights- the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights – ICCPR and the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights – ICESCR. These two covenants were eventually adopted by the General Assembly in December 1966. Almost ten years later both Covenants came into effect. These Covenants incorporated the rights set out in the UDHR. The ICCPR and ICESCR are legally binding on member states who are signatories. Some states have ratified these Covenants with reservations to certain articles.

Human Rights

The Human Rights Council – HRC which replaced the for UN Commission on Human Rights – CHR was created by the United Nations General Assembly on 15 March 2006 by resolution 60/251. It is an inter-governmental body with membership of 47 UN member states. Its first session took place from 19 to 30 June 2006 and the forth coming session will be from February to March 2018 – the 37th session.

The HRC is responsible for the promotion, protection and strengthening of all human rights around the globe. HRC’s regular sessions takes place three times a year – March, June and September. But special sessions can be called by an appeal or declaration to the President of the HRC by at least 18 members of the HRC. Compared to the earlier CHR, the ten-year-old HRC has a new mechanism known as the Universal Periodic Review – UPR. This mechanism scrutinises or questions all UN member States on their track record on Human Rights. This is the only mechanism which allows member states to question or make recommendations to a fellow member state.

The Universal Periodic Review Working Group holds three two-week sessions per year. During each session 16 countries are reviewed, therefore 48 countries per year and 193 countries by the entire UN membership over the course of the UPR cycle.  Each UPR review is facilitated by groups of three States, or “troikas”, who act as rapporteurs. Now the 3rd cycle is in process.

The UN Special Procedures established by the former CHR are now with the HRC – Special rapporteurs, Special representatives, Independent experts, Working groups and Committees that monitor, examine, advice and publicly report on thematic issues or human rights situations in specific countries.

The earlier Sub-Commission on Promotion and Protection of Human Rights is now known as the Advisory Committee which serves as the HRC’s “think tank” providing it with expertise and advice on thematic human rights issues and the Complaints Procedure.

Monitoring Mechanisms & ICC

The Rome statute of the International Criminal Court (ICC) and the Optional protocol to the CRC on the sale of Children, child prostitution and child pornography are very good examples of International NGOs lobby for the implementation of conventions because certain states will fund the promotion of their favourite conventions and protocols.

Even though there are 193 member states in the UN, as of 1 December 2017, only 123 countries are state Parties to the Rome Statute of the ICC. Out of them 33 are African states; 19 are Asia-Pacific states; 18 are from Eastern Europe; 28 are from Latin American and Caribbean states and 25 are from Western European and other states.

Normally the conventions which give a hard time, to interfere with the revenue of states, get the least funding and those conventions are not very popular among the money-making INGOs.

As of 28 November 2017, 167 countries have ratified the Optional Protocol on the involvement of children in armed conflict. Some of the countries which have signed the protocol have yet to ratify it.

As of 28 November 2017, 173 countries have ratified the Optional Protocol on the Sale of Children, Child Prostitution and Child Pornography. Here too many countries have not yet ratified it.

The post of High Commissioner for Human Rights was established in December 1993 and functions under the Secretariat of the UN. The High Commissioner and the Human Rights Council co-ordinate with the General Assembly and the Secretary General.

The human rights records of all the member states are monitored through the HRC’s Working Groups, Special rapporteurs, Country rapporteurs, Special representatives and Independent experts. The Working Groups (e.g. Working Group on Arbitrary Detention, Working Group on Enforced or Involuntary Disappearances; Special Rapporteurs (Thematic – e.g. Extrajudicial summary or arbitrary executions, Freedom of opinion and expression, Freedom of religion or belief, Independence of judges and lawyers, Torture and other cruel, inhuman treatment, Violence against women, Right to food, Right to education, Adequate housing, etc.) and Country rapporteurs (Belarus, Cambodia, Central African Republic – CAR, Democratic People’s Republic of Korea – North Korea, Eritrea, Iran) operate under the guidance of the HRC. The HRC works closely with the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights – OHCHR.

In the meantime there are Special representatives and Independent experts under the UN Secretary General who also monitor Thematic issues and country situations (Human Rights Defenders, Children and Armed conflict, Internally Displaced people, Children and armed conflict, Cambodia, Haiti, Somalia, etc.). They also report on their findings to the session of the HRC.

By going through these UN human rights mechanisms, one can understand how far Sri Lanka respects those mechanisms. In brief, Sri Lanka is very good at signing whatever convention will please the international community. When it comes to implementation, they play hide and seek.

Politicisation of Human Rights

There is an accusation that UN Human Rights, mainly the HRC is politicised, is it true?

Governments other than the monarchy, military and dictatorship are elected from political parties. Whether a government is formed by a president/prime minister or monarchy or a military leader, they appoint their favourable candidates as ambassadors, high commissioners and representatives to their respective embassies and consulates in foreign countries including to the United Nations. These people are known to the world as diplomats. There are career diplomats as well as political appointees. Now-a-days even the career diplomats from developing countries are using their political influence to get their promotions and appointments for better assignments.

These diplomats become the spokesperson for their government’s policy and carry out the orders given by their political leaders through the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and other Ministries.

When these people are involved in UN affairs, especially UN Human Rights tasks, they are obviously part of politicization.

Now-a-days, the regional amity among the states, the club mentality among governments which have the worst record on human rights, the fact that many countries oppose UN scrutiny under the pretext of fighting terrorism, make the UN human rights mechanisms immovable. Since 11 September 2001, the states have found the easiest method of covering their bad record on human rights.

In the HRC, the powerful states use their political influence and support to avoid the examination of human rights violations in their countries and also to protect the countries which have bilateral links with them.  Some states even insist that they are exempt from UN scrutiny because what takes place in their countries is an “internal affair”.

Right to self-determination

Oppression against the struggles in exercise of the right to self-determination is one of the main root causes for the horrendous human rights violations around the world.

Article 1 (one) of both the ICCPR and ICESCR states that “all peoples have the right of self-determination. By virtue of that right they freely determine their political status and freely pursue their economic, social and cultural development”.

Gradually Article 1 lost it weight. It is no longer in the agenda of the HRC because all five permanent members of the Security Council – the United States, United Kingdom, France, Russia and China have their own problem concerning this article. In USA the people of Alaska, Hawaii and Puerto Rico are struggling for self-determination; in the United Kingdom – the Northern Island crisis is still not resolved; Scotland and Walls are in the queue. In France the people of Corsica and Bretagne are demanding their political rights, while in Russia and China – people of Chechnya, Tibet, Uyghur (East Turkestan) and many others are struggling for their self-determination. On such situations regarding the question of right to self-determination, International law appears to be powerless. A few years ago it was a different story.

The recent political turmoil in Spain, Iraq and Italy: regarding the Catalan and Kurdish peoples, and northern regions of Italy – Veneto (Venice), and Lombardy (Milan) are good examples that self-determination is still an issue.

With all these hurdles, the NGOs have been successful to a certain extent in their human rights advocacy, “Naming and shaming” the states which are violating human rights.  Some states misuse the UN procedures and have their own NGOs who are known as GONGOs (Government NGOs) in UN circles. These GONGOs not only advocate government policy, they also counter the accusations made by the genuine NGOs against states.  GONGOs are indirectly funded by the governments’ agencies and they are to some extent members of the espionage. Since 2012, there have been many GONGOs working on Sri Lanka in the HRC in Geneva.

The writer is the founder General Secretary, Tamil Centre for Human Rights – TCHR, France

Managing expectations about post-war justice processes

By Jehan Perera-December 11, 2017, 8:54 pm 

The government’s commitment to the post-war transitional justice process can be seen in the Constitutional Council’s nomination of seven members to be commissioners of the Office of Missing Persons. As the Constitutional Council includes the Prime Minister, governmental sanction necessarily accompanies its choices although constitutional council members include the opposition and civil society. The movement forward of the reconciliation process has been in fits and starts, in particular where issues of transitional justice that involve the victims of war are concerned. But it is to the government’s credit that they have never abandoned it. This is particularly true of the office of missing persons, with its mandate to investigate any action where people went missing in any year on in any part of the country. The OMP has been constituted to be a permanent body with a standing not less than that of the Human Rights Commission.

The OMP was initially legislated in August 2016. Thereafter there have been prolonged delays in getting it functional. First the legislation regarding it had to be amended. This was on account of the original legislation failing to take into account some amendments made by political parties that were supportive of the legislation. The next delay was due to the President’s failure to allocate the OMP to any ministry. Finally in July 2017 President Sirisena allocated the OMP to the Reconciliation Ministry which comes under his direct purview. But this seemingly responsible gesture was not taken kindly by supporters of the reconciliation process who found fault with the President for taking on the OMP as they believed it was an over extension of his powers which had been limited by the 19th Amendment.

The latest delay has been in the appointment of commissioners to operationalise the OMP. It is reported that the Constitutional Council has now made its choice. The question is how long it will take to approve the commissioners. It is reported that one of the members of the Constitutional Council has objected to one of the proposed commissioners. However, the willingness of the Constitutional Council to nominate their choices of commissioners to the President suggests that even in the midst of an important election campaign, the government leaders do not think that the issue of the OMP is politically too sensitive to take up at this time. This indicates their belief that the majority of people also accept the need for a mechanism to inform families of missing persons of the whereabouts of their loved ones.

SLOW PACE

The desire to know the fate of persons who went missing without a trace is not unique to any one community. In the course of the three decade long war with the Tamil militant movement the majority of victims were Tamil. But large numbers of military personnel who were mostly Sinhalese also went missing. The Presidential Commission to Investigate into Complaints regarding Missing Persons that was appointed in August 2013 by former President Mahinda Rajapaksa received over 24,000 complaints relating to missing persons of which about 5000 were from families of missing military personnel. There were several incidents during the course of the war in which the LTTE overran military camps and killed almost all they captured. In the case of the Mullaitivu army camp which fell in 1996, about a thousand soldiers were killed in two days and many of the bodies disposed of without record.

Another very large group of people who went missing was the tens of thousands who perished during the period of the JVP insurrection in the late 1980s. Even today there is no commonly accepted figure for casualties, although the figure of 60,000 is frequently mentioned. This is not dissimilar to the figure of 40,000 which is also frequently given in regard to those who lost their lives in the last phase of the LTTE war. Tracing what happened to the soldiers who died or to the victims of the JVP insurrection will be very difficult as the hard evidence will be lacking. As the OMP has not been given a time frame within which they need to conduct their investigations nor are they limited in their freedom to decide which incidents to investigate, they will certainly be asked to investigate the fate of these missing persons too.

The difficulties that the OMP will face in attempting to track down missing persons from the security forces and from the JVP period is an indication of the problems they will face when it comes to tracing the fate of those who went missing in the last phase of the war. The disposal of the bodies of the victims will mean it is going to be very difficult to find out what actually happened to them individually. A similar situation would exist in the cases of the JVP insurgents or suspects, some of whom were cremated on tyres on roads. The discovery of mass graves in Mannar in the North of the country and in Matale in the South of the country, a hotbed of JVP activity would suggest that many of the victims were also cremated or buried in mass graves.

However, these investigations have been proceeding very slowly due to both lack of forensic evidence expertise and resistance from vested interests. Studies done in other parts of the world have shown that the process of tracing people and identifying the identity of human remains after many years is an extremely difficult task. In Kosovo where over 30,000 people went missing even a well staffed and well equipped investigation system is able to process only about 100 cases a year. With Kosovo being in the middle of Europe it has access to both financial resources and expertise from neigbouring European countries. But the slow rate of tracing is an indication of the complex nature of ascertaining what happened in the past.

HIGH EXPECTATIONS

There are several challenges that the OMP will be subjected to that need to be considered. The first will be to manage the high expectations of the families of the missing persons. Many if not most of them continue to hope against hope that their loved ones continue to be alive and are being held in some place of detention, most likely by the security forces. Whenever government authorities tell them that there are no such places they get highly agitated and accuse those in government of being deceitful. Both President Sirisena and Prime Minister Wickremesinghe have each said that their government is not holding anyone in places of secret detention .

After the setting up of the OMP the expectation will be rife that it will swiftly locate the missing persons. But as the situation in Kosovo indicates the pace of finding out what happened to those who went missing is extremely time consuming. Such a slow pace will not be acceptable in Sri Lanka. The families of the missing are likely to believe that the OMP too is duping them. On the other hand, if the OMP discloses to the families that their loved one is either dead or they are unable to trace what happened to him, this truth will be difficult for the families to bear. It would be necessary that the OMP should function as part of a package of reforms that include the provision of psychological counseling and economic assistance for development purposes.

The biggest challenge will be that of ensuring accountability. The ongoing case against former Navy spokesman and five others, who are currently in remand custody over the alleged disappearances of 11 youths in 2008 is an example. Replying to the defence lawyer who was critical of the treatment of a war hero, the lawyer representing the state said this was not an ordinary allegation but an investigation about the disappearances of eleven youths who were not even LTTE supporters. he said,

"We are mindful of the fact about people who had served the nation, but that does not mean that they received licenses to abduct innocent people to demand ransom. Investigations are still going on and much revealing evidence is being filed into this inquiry. So it is not appropriate that counsel behave shouting at the Judge like a bull in a fish market"

The victims are demanding an international or hybrid system of courts in which foreign judges will be active as they are mistrustful of the efficacy of the national system of justice. They want justice which is also important for society as a whole. The government position has been that foreign judges will not sit in judgment in the courts. The government needs to create a credible system of transitional justice in which all sections of the people can place their trust. It is also the responsibility of religious leaders, their clergy and civil society to both demand this and to educate the general population about these issues. It is easy for those who are not ready to bear responsibility to raise the expectations of the people. It is important that those with deep psychological wounds be cared for and unrealistic expectations be managed.