Peace for the World

Peace for the World
First democratic leader of Justice the Godfather of the Sri Lankan Tamil Struggle: Honourable Samuel James Veluppillai Chelvanayakam

Friday, February 16, 2018

National Prosperity Role of Education Decided by the population…!



By Ananda Ariyarathne-2018-02-16

National Prosperity is the well-being of the 'nation' and any efforts made to understand the whole scenario without understanding the major aspects relevant to the population can be purely superficial and very misleading. The population of any country shall depend mainly on the wealth of able bodied people who can be very productive.

A population with a very large percentage of elderly people is different from the scenario where a larger percentage is younger people, who are naturally more energetic. Any plans made without understanding this aspect shall end up in wrong strategies.

Aspects of population

Based on the latest estimates of the United Nations, the population of Sri Lanka is 20, 921,515 as of Friday, February 9, 2018. For its size, Sri Lanka has a considerable population. Naturally, the most densely populated areas are the urban concentrations that have developed around regional main cities, starting with Colombo. The Annual Growth rate applicable has been identified as 0.913%, which is almost 01%.

Composition of the population with regard to age shows that the 'effective manpower' is about 42.6% which covers the Age Bracket - section that is 25-54 years. It is a highly significant aspect as it is this bracket that becomes the most productive. It also gives an alarming signal that the remaining 57.4% is less or not productive and therefore can become more or less a burden.

Another indication is that just an ordinary effort shall not bring in any positive results. That means that the efforts to be made have to be exceptionally efficient and productive.

The age bracket 54-65 years amounts to 09.1% of the population and the effectiveness of that group depends on the strategic approaches decided by policy makers. This is an aspect that evidently had not received due attention. The complication comes linked with 'retirement age' and it is amply proved by the presence of retired officials being recruited to man projects and special assignments.

The negative aspect of that group is the possible loss of physical efficiency due to old age which wears out the capacity for endurance. The level of experience of that sector can be useful as the knowledge required in skills development in the capacity enhancement of available human resources is already there, and it shall be a matter of identifying the logical path to be taken.

Therefore, it is a group that need not be set aside as useless. Together, those two sections make roughly about 51.7% of the population. The indication that people above 65 years of age cover 8.1% of the population indicate that such individuals belong to 'the dependent portion of the population' who become the burden of the government under its 'social security' responsibilities.

Out of the 'Dependent Bracket,' 24.1% are in the 0-14 year age group as actually the first part of national investment as it is the section that offers the 'nation' resource material for the 'Future Work Force.' The most important age group is 15-24 years which covers High School and University levels. That section of the population that can be tagged as 'National Youth Resources Base' as it is this vibrant portion that can be really productive and it amounts roughly to 18.5%.

Another highly sensitive area for the government is the special attention it has to give to prevent malnutrition and to offer Public Health related programmes to ensure a healthy society. The most important measurement is the birth rate, which denote maternity and post natal care, which indicates the necessity to ensure a healthy base for Human Resources. That is another high cost area that cannot be avoided but definitely is an essential sector in 'National Investment in Human Resources. '

Unavoidable Sociological aspects

Although Sri Lanka is categorized as a country with multiple ethnicities, there are only two most prominent communities and they are the Sinhalese and the Sri Lankan Tamils. Historical facts point out that the Sinhalese people had been the main community that occupied this country predominantly. Constant influence from the South India civilization which existed right throughout made it a natural development that there is a considerable number of people identified as Sri Lankan Tamils who do not obviously have any biological differences from the Sinhalese, as they are just one people divided by two cultures.

Due to periodical exposures to direct administration by Tamil rulers who came there with their armies settled down, the Tamil community of the north and eastern parts of Sri Lanka was created.
Subsequently, when the British rulers brought in Tamil workers to serve in the newly introduced Plantation Sector, Sri Lanka got a sizeable Tamil Community added on to the population of Sri Lanka. It is a significant aspect as the Sri Lankan Tamil population was less than the Indian Tamils at the time of Independence. (Sinhalese 74.9%, Sri Lankan Tamil 11.2%, Sri Lankan Moors 9.2%, Indian Tamil 4.2%, other 0.5% (2012 estimates).

As it stands now, the composition is that the Sinhalese make up around 75% of the total population and are concentrated in the Central and South-western parts of the country while the ancient Sinhalese Villages still exist in the Northern and Eastern regions.

The Tamil people make up around 11.9% of the total population identified as Sri Lankan Tamils and Indian Tamils and have become the largest minority present in the country.

This created a highly sensitive relationship that led to a war that caused bloodshed and traumatic experiences which have left behind grievances and hard feelings which call for more serious thinking in planning. For example a housing project in the South can be just a normal facility while a similar housing scheme in the North or East where people underwent severe hardships may involve families of single mothers who do not have breadwinners. These mothers may not have life experience other than 'combat life' and other connected rigors, which cannot even be discussed in public without creating embarrassment to the victims. Their main concern would be employment that would be inseparable from any solutions given to such people.

Muslims who have evolved out of migrant South Indian people as well as the Sinhalese and have become the second largest community are spread all over the country as a special community of people who played a major role in internal as well as external trading. This unique composition has a direct influence on 'politics' and that way on government policies. The consequential outcome is its effect on policy planning, although it is an aspect never admitted officially. At times, it has become an unnecessary obstacle to planning realistically logical regional development. This has affected the most important national investment – Education, which is the basis for Human Resources Development.

Population related features

Although it is officially recognized that there is a very 'positive large work force,' the absence of a realistic master plan has prevented really meaningful economic development that can envelope the total population and that way to achieve a truly meaningful effort to bring about prosperity to all people without any discriminatory developments, in the overall picture.

The information we have through the most reliable sources headed by the Department of Statistics shows that the Adult population in Sri Lanka is 14, 884,042 and it tells us another aspect that the younger section of the population is approximately about two thirds of the population. As the classification of 'adult' best fits youth who have passed 18 years, we can see that such youth shall have to wait at least six more years before they can be employed. That is a position which denotes two aspects at the same time. One is that the young citizen has become a 'Revenue Earner' and ceases to be a dependent, while he or she has become an active contributor to national productivity.

Our status

Now the population in our country is 20, 950,041 as per information available in the month of January 2018 and just 70 years ago, just after two years from independence, the population had been 7,971,098 and the present population is almost a threefold increase. It raises the question whether the real development achieved is in line with the 'National Burden or the Responsibility' that kept on increasing. The importance is in the ability of a government to envisage the magnitude of complications that shall come connected.

Role of Education

It is quite evident that it is not just a process where some scholars get together and set an imaginary path for the National Economy to take.

As the whole process starts and ends with the people, it is highly essential that there is a clear understanding about the people and it is the correct and most logical analysis of the features of the population that can give guidance in identifying key issues.

Then taking stock of the assets, the resources we already have and then the assets and resources that can be acquired in the process.

Taking the national status first for understanding the national goals and then breaking down the processes to identify 'Contributory Plans' shall give us the most logical path we have to resort to.
Now we can understand the significance of the Framework that has to be set by any government in its plans for investment in Human Resources. Roughly, it is youth 18 - 25 years who can be diverted into the areas of specializations to suit national needs.

As all the youth cannot end up as scholars and geniuses, the youth shall have to be provided with opportunities to enhance their capacities in the areas they shall be most effective.

The Investment by the government in people is here and if the Education Policy has features which look very impressive but borrowed from Finland or any other place, such shall not give the answers to the challenges our nation has. The total education shall go through preschool, primary, elementary, secondary, university and post graduate levels but as a logically and effortlessly interwoven system that shall be linked to all the remotest sections in our society and that shall be the only way to conserve our natural resources and generate more resources that can and shall bring in benefits to our nation.

Courtesy - Department of Census & Statistics, and other resources found on Internet
About the writer

A Graduate from the University of Ceylon, Peradeniya and read for MBA at the PIM, is a Management Consultant, specialized in 'sick unit rehabilitation' has Four Books already to his credit, and serves as a visiting lecturer and an Examiner at SLIDA

Can a Magistrate convict and jail AG, a superior court Judge or a minister for expressing his opinion? – II


article_image
By M. M. Zuhair PC- 

It will be obvious that the matter raises questions of fundamental importance to the right of the Attorney-General to express his opinion, to advise his client irrespective of whether his opinion was right or wrong. Several issues may be raised in this regard. Is a Magistrate, who is subject to the directions of the Attorney-General in the several instances specified in the Code of Criminal Procedure Act, empowered to review and sit in judgment over a legal opinion expressed by the Attorney-General? Is the Attorney-General or for that matter any Attorney-at-Law not entitled to express a legal opinion irrespective of any regard for anyone benefitting or gaining any advantage thereby? Does the law relating to legal advice require the Hon. Attorney-General or an Attorney-at-Law to investigate like the police, whether anyone will unlawfully benefit or get favoured or advantaged, before expressing his opinion on the facts as presented to him by his client and/or on the law as he sees it?

Is it not a violation of the fundamental right of freedom of expression and speech, freedom of thought, the freedom to engage oneself in a lawful profession, to be threatened with incarceration in jail of upto 10 years, for expressing an opinion, right or wrong, with or without the knowledge that any unlawful benefit, favour or advantage will be conferred thereby on any person? Is the Hon Attorney-General not entitled to tender a ‘conditional pardon’ to an accused or to enter a ‘nolleprosequi’ even though his decision will confer a benefit, favour or advantage to the accused in a case pending before a Judge? Can the Attorney-General be prosecuted under section 70 if his opinion had resulted in a wrongful benefit to the accused in a case where the investigating Police had suppressed a relevant fact and the AG had based his opinion on the facts before him? Can a Magistrate be prosecuted on a section 70 charge for wrongfully or unlawfully convicting an accused, which benefits the complainant, when the conviction is set aside in appeal by a higher Court?

These issues require the earnest consideration of the Attorney-General in particular, the Cabinet, the judiciary, the Bar and the public in general. It is important to protect the best interests of the public, good governance, the proper and orderly functioning of the State, Judiciary, the official and the unofficial bar. The right of the Attorney-General and Attorneys at Law to express and communicate their respective opinion to the President, the Speaker and the client with secure freedom and absolute candour is vital for the independence, integrity and proper functioning of the legal system and public life. Any challenges to the smooth and orderly functioning of a long and well established system must be viewed with great care, foresight and wisdom.

Sections 126 to 129 of the Evidence Ordinance deal with the status and confidentiality of professional communications between an Attorney-at-Law and his client and the privileged position of such communications. These salutary provisions in our law ought not to be violated, side-tracked or ignored. The rights of the legislature, the executive, the judiciary and the public as enshrined not only in the Evidence Ordinance but also in the Constitution, the laws and rulings of our superior Courts need to be jealously protected.

The role and status of the Attorney-General are extensive and exclusive. He is appointed by the President on the recommendation of the Constitutional Council. His office is not subject to the Public Service Commission. He is the chief legal advisor of the President, the Government, the Speaker, the Parliament and the public service. The Attorney-General has the right to be heard in proceedings in the Supreme Court in the exercise of its constitutional jurisdiction, fundamental rights jurisdiction, consultative jurisdiction initiated by the President and breach of the privileges of Parliament. It is the duty of the Attorney-General to examine every Bill and communicate his opinion to the President and when the Bill is before Parliament to communicate his opinion to the Speaker of Parliament.

He is the leader of the Bar and the highest legal officer of the State. It is he who makes the opening welcome speech on behalf of the Bar at ceremonial sittings of the Supreme Court and the Court of Appeal. Magistrates are subject to the directions of the Attorney-General on specified matters. The Attorney-General is entitled to take over the prosecution pending before a Magistrate. He can pardon an accomplice to a crime. He can direct a Magistrate to tender a pardon to an accomplice. He can direct a Magistrate who has discharged an accused to hold further inquiry or direct the accused to be committed to the High Court. He can quash a Magistrate’s order of committal to the High Court and direct the Magistrate to discharge the accused. Many more are his powers and duties.

The Attorney-General’s role in the administration of justice is unique and distinctive. The exercise of his powers, the performance of his duties and his role in the administration of justice are sanctioned by law, legal practices, rulings of superior Courts and accord with statutory provisions. The Attorney-General must be free to form his opinion and communicate his opinion without being threatened. He may be wrong in his views and his opinion may be rejected by a superior Court but he must be guaranteed the fullest freedom to express his opinion free of any consequential threat of prosecution. His official functions, as distinct from his personal or private ones, must not be dictated to or stifled by any bureaucrat today or the police tomorrow. The fundamental rights of the Attorney-General, acting in his official capacity in the discharge of his functions, as distinguished from an officer committing an offence in his private or personal capacity, appear to have been violated.

These proceedings initiated before a Magistrate could also be a precedent and open the flood gates to similarly invite Magistrates (or the High Court) to review the opinion expressed by the Court of Appeal, the Supreme Court or the Cabinet of Ministers in given situations. According to section 90 of the Bribery Act "public servant" includes inter alia a Minister, Provincial Minister, Member of Parliament, Member of Provincial Council, every officer or employee of the State, etc. Opinions and decisions are required to be taken regularly by the Executive headed by the President, by Ministers, by the Cabinet and by the Courts. These decisions are often taken both with and without reference to any person benefitting from such decisions.

To interpret or allege such decisions as wrongful or unlawful particularly after the holders of such office had ceased to hold the office and in this case after seven long years, could become a common occurrence that could lead to abuse of section 70 for personal or political purposes. Public servants would be unwilling to take decisions and governance could ground to a virtual halt, adversely affecting the people, if decision makers in the legislature, executive or judiciary are to be hauled up before Courts, particularly after they had ceased to hold the concerned office or upon a change of government, on allegations of expressing views or taking decisions alleging them to be wrongful.

The above proceedings initiated in the Chief Magistrate’s Court must be examined by the Attorney-General, the highest legal officer of the State in the interest of justice. We need to leave aside our personal prejudices, if any, against the concerned individuals. The principles and not the personalities involved must be given utmost consideration. The Attorney-General might consider acting under section 393(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure Act and/or take over the prosecution and lead no evidence as had been done in many cases or even enter a ‘nolleprosequi’.

( The views expressed here are personal to the writer. Contrary views are welcome. Writer can be reached at mm_zuhair@yahoo.com).

Arrest warrant against Jaliya re-issued

logoFebruary 16, 2018
The Colombo Fort Magistrate today re- issued a warrant to arrest former Sri Lankan Ambassador to the United States Jaliya Wickramasuriya for failing to appear before Court.
Magistrate Lanka Jayaratne issued this order as the suspect failed to appear before the courts when the case was taken up for hearing today (15).
The Magistrate also issued notices against his wife and a cousin sister who were the sureties when he was granted bail.  
Jaliya Wickramasuriya, who is under investigation for allegedly misusing state funds, was permitted to travel abroad by the Fort Magistrate’s Court on July 10.
Fort Magistrate Lanka Jayaratne lifted the travel ban following a request made by a Counsel who appeared on behalf of Wickramasuriya. The Counsel has apprised the Court that his client requires to travel to the US, Ada Derana reporter said.
Wickramasuriya was earlier arrested by the Police Financial Crimes Investigation Division (FCID) at the Katunayake airport on November 17 when he was preparing to travel overseas.   
He has been charged with allegedly accepting a commission of US$ 332,000 following a contract awarded to refurbish the Sri Lankan Embassy in Washington DC while serving as the Ambassador to the US, under the previous government.

Asma Jahangir fought for human rights across borders



logoSaturday, 17 February 2018

When Asma Jahangir, the Pakistani human rights campaigner who single handedly took on the civil, military, and religious establishment in her country, died in Lahore on 11 February, she had spent 48 of her 66 years in the war against injustice.

But her concern was not just for the deprived in Pakistan alone. It extended to several countries including Iran and neighboring India.

She believed that Pakistan and India are chips off the old block facing the same problems and attempting to solve them in the same undesirable ways which have widened existing rifts instead of reducing them. She told this writer: “Looking at the way India and Pakistan are quarreling, they seem to be the biggest jokers in the world.”

Despite the ever present threat posed by the military establishment to democracy in Pakistan, Asma felt that democracy would bounce back.

“Democracy has made gains and even military dictators had to bow out because they had lost public support. If democracy has been slow to take root in Pakistan it is because it has not been given a fair chance,” she argued.

Asma’s career in justice began when she was just 18. She filed a case to get her politician father Malik Ghulam Jilani released from prison in a politically motivated case. Jilani had been arbitrarily detained by the military government of Gen. Yahya Khan .The case led to a historic Supreme Court judgment.

It wasn’t long before she and her sister Hina Jilani established Pakistan’s first all-women legal firm in Lahore. Their clients included Christians facing death sentences on blasphemy charges, bonded labourers who had fled the iron grip of feudal landlords, and women who faced violence at home.

Asma was a rebel in Islamic Pakistan even in her personal habits. She smoked openly, daring the men to object. At her funeral at the Gaddafi Stadium, women participated, and that too in very large numbers even ousting men from the front rows to be near the body of their icon. Even in her death, Asma was subverting the establishment key elements of which are in the grip of Wahabists.

When the hard as nails Gen. Zia-ul-Haq was ruling the roost in Pakistan in the 1980s, Asma dared to form the Women’s Action Forum (WAF), which confronted the military dictator on the “Hudood Ordinance” which prescribed punishments as per the Sharia. She argued that the ordinance discriminated against women.

Mother of Pakistan’s Human Rights Movement

In 1983, Asma and other WAF protestors faced fierce violence at the hands of the police and were arrested. As the mother of the human rights movement in Pakistan, Asma was one of the founders of the Human Rights Commission of Pakistan, a fiercely independent NGO she headed for several years. She opposed tooth and nail, Pakistan’s infamous Blasphemy Law which can be easily misused to finish off individuals who are non-Muslims. The sentence for blasphemy – a very loosely defined series of acts – is death.

In 1995, even in the face of violent threats from Islamic vigilante mobs, Asma and her sister Hina Jilani successfully defended two Christian teenagers, Salamat Masih and Rehmat Masih, in their appeals against death sentences for blasphemy. Her car was smashed by an angry mob baying for the blood of the two boys. As her detractors were targeting her two daughters, Asma sent them abroad to continue their schooling.

“Sometimes you have to pay an unbearable price for what you believe in,” she told Amnesty International.

In 1999, a gunman shot dead Samia Imran, a victim of domestic abuse, when the lady was in Asma’s office drafting a divorce petition with the help of Asma’s sister Hina. One of the bullets narrowly missed Hina.

Undeterred by violence against her, Asma “confronted injustice wherever she saw it,” to quote Amnesty International Secretary General Salil Shetty. She would champion the cause of women, children, bonded labourers, religious minorities, journalists, and the disappeared.

In 2007, Asma Jahangir was placed under house arrest by then President Gen. Pervez Musharraf when he imposed a State of Emergency, suspending the constitution and arbitrarily detaining hundreds of people, including judges, opposition politicians, and human rights defenders.

Asma had been UN Special Rapporteur three times – on extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions; on freedom of religion or belief, and, most recently, on Iran.

Her 2008 report on religious freedom in India as UN Special Rapporteur on Freedom of Religion or Belief was both truthful and fair as she believed that no human rights issue can be addressed in a biased and one-sided way. She had no agenda other than the protection of the rights of all, including the State – the legitimate authority.

Fight against religious discrimination

Asma pointed out the injustices perpetrated by the anti-conversion law in several Indian States in her report on freedom of religious belief in India written in 2008. The law made change of religion a public matter and not a matter of personal choice. It eroded individual freedom severely. The anti-conversion laws carry penalties of imprisonment and fines with harsher penalties in the case children, women or persons belonging to the scheduled castes or scheduled tribes.

Furthermore, in some states, anyone converting another person from one religion to another is required to obtain prior permission from state authorities thirty days before the date of the intended conversion. In other states with such laws, anyone intending to change his or her religion needs to give prior notice or intimation after the conversion ceremony.

Asma reported attacks on religious minorities and their places of worship as well as of discrimination against the disempowered sections of the Hindu community.

Widespread violence in the Kandhamal district of Orissa in December, 2007 primarily targeted Christians in Dalit and tribal communities. By the end of September, 2008, more than 40 people had allegedly been killed in Orissa, over 4,000 Christian homes destroyed and around 50 churches demolished. Around 20,000 people were living in relief camps and more than 40,000 people hiding in forests and others places.

Reporting on counter-terrorism measures

Following the riots in Godhra in 2002, many Muslim interlocutors informed Asma that a number of them had been arrested on ill-founded suspicion of terrorism. Some of them even encountered problems in finding a lawyer who would be prepared to defend a terrorist suspect.

However, many Muslims were disturbed that terrorism was associated with their religion despite various public statements from Muslim leadership denouncing terrorism.

A large number of her interlocutors, including Muslims, also expressed their concern about continued radicalisation and cross-border terrorism. They lamented that the radicalisation of certain Muslims had an adverse impact on the entire community because communal relations hardened after every act of terrorism carried out by a militant group of Muslims.     

Asma reported on the counter-terrorism measures adopted by the Government that undermined the enjoyment of human rights in Kashmir. But in all this, Asma did not ignore the plight of the Kashmiri Pundits (Hindus) who had to flee Kashmir in thousands to escape from Pakistan-inspired Muslim militants.

With regard to the social, economic and educational status of the Dalits who had converted to Christianity and Islam she noted that converts were ineligible for State benefits and welfare programs meant for Dalits.

In 2008, an independent research study commissioned by the National Commission for Minorities found that there was a strong case for offering Muslims and Christians of Dalit origin the same constitutional safeguards already available to Hindu, Sikh and Buddhist Dalits.

Many of the Special Rapporteur’s interlocutors referred to the anti-Sikh riots after the attack by the Indian army on the Golden Temple in Amritsar (“Operation Blue Star”) in June 1984 and subsequent to the tragic assassination of Ms. Indira Gandhi on 31 October 1984. During the following four days, nearly 3,000 Sikhs were reported to have been killed.

Two commissions and eight committees were set up from 1984 to 2005 in order to identify those responsible for the anti-Sikh riots. But many families of the victims or survivors said that the main accused had gone scot free.

Asma referred to the sorry state of the Muslims in comparison with the Hindus in terms of employment and education but she also noted that the government, especially at the Center, had put in place institutions to look after the welfare of the Muslims and other minorities, including a separate ministry for them. Several commissions had reported on the inadequacies faced by the Muslims and suggested remedial measures.

Israeli protesters urge Netanyahu to step down over bribery allegations



FEBRUARY 16, 2018

TEL AVIV (Reuters) - Israeli demonstrators gathered in Tel Aviv on Friday to urge Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to resign after police recommended he be charged with bribery in two corruption cases.

Police said on Tuesday enough evidence had been found for Netanyahu to be charged, saddling the four-term premier with one of the biggest challenges to his long dominance of Israeli politics.

Netanyahu, 68, denies wrongdoing in both cases and has said nothing will come of the police investigations. It is now up to the attorney general to determine whether to press charges against him.
Around 1,000-2,000 protesters rallied in a Tel Aviv square, some with signs saying “crooks go home” and “crime minister”.

“We think the prime minister should immediately disqualify himself and resign,” said Shlomit Bar, 63, a retired music teacher. “He cannot be any longer the prime minister of Israel.”

There is no strict legal obligation for a prime minister to step down over such a case unless he is convicted in court. The right-wing Netanyahu’s governing coalition appears stable for the time being after key partners said they will wait until the attorney general’s decision.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu speaks during the Muni World 2018 conference in Tel Aviv, Israel February 14, 2018. REUTERS/Nir Elias

“From a moral standpoint, this is a disgrace to the state of Israel, where a prime minister is suspected of such serious crimes,” said Oren Simon, one of the protesters. “He should go home. Enough.”
A poll published on Wednesday showed almost half of Israel’s electorate believe the police rather than Netanyahu.


The poll, aired on the Israeli commercial television channel Reshet, said 49 percent of respondents sided with the police’s version that Netanyahu had acted improperly. Twenty-five percent said they believed Netanyahu. The remainder, 26 percent, said they did not know whom to believe.

Forty-nine percent said he should stay in office, and 43 percent that he should suspend himself.

The first case in which Netanyahu is a suspect involves receiving gifts, including cigars, champagne and jewellery, from businessmen. The second involves discussing a deal with the publisher of Israel’s best-selling newspaper for better coverage in return for curbs on a rival newspaper.

It could be months before the attorney general makes a decision on whether to charge him.

Reporting by Rami Amichai; writing by Maayan Lubell; editing by Mark Heinrich

Are weapons at the heart of Britain’s romance with Israel?

James Arbuthnot, a British politician, lobbies both for Israel and the weapons industry. Chatham House/Flickr
David Cronin Lobby Watch 16 February 2018
What are British politicians really saying when they wax lyrical about Israel? Do they genuinely believe the myths about it being a thriving democracy? Or are they in awe of how Israel can – quite literally – get away with murder?
Gavin Williamson, Britain’s defense secretary, has hinted that there is something rotten behind the romance. After celebrating Israel as a “beacon of light and hope” during a recent speech, he described its military investments as “impressive.”
If Williamson has done a modicum of homework, he must know that the Israeli weapons industry brags – albeit in a coded way – about testing its products on Palestinians living under siege and occupation. His fawning betrayed an admiration for how a profitable industry has been built through subjugating an entire people.
The fawning occurred when Williamson addressed a reception organized by Conservative Friends of Israel, a pressure group within Britain’s ruling party. He was among kindred spirits: it is unlikely to a be a coincidence that some of the group’s most ardent supporters are also lobbyists for the arms industry.
Take James Arbuthnot. In 2015, Arbuthnot was hired by Thales UK, a branch of the French weapons-maker Thales. He had previously chaired Conservative Friends of Israel. He also sat in the British parliament for 28 years.
Announcing the recruitment, Thales UK stated that Arbuthnot would join its advisory board. As its advisers are not “formal officers” of the company, they are “expressly prohibited” from lobbying on its behalf, Thales added.

Submarine supporter

While Arbuthnot may not have directly solicited business for Thales since then, he has taken part in discussions of relevance to the firm.
After his appointment by Thales, Arbuthnot later in 2015 joined the House of Lords, the unelected upper chamber in the British parliament. He has used that platform to advocate that Britain should develop four nuclear submarines.
Thales works on Britain’s nuclear submarine program. By opposing disarmament, Arbuthnot was pushing a political agenda conducive to his employer and the wider arms industry.
Does Arbuthnot erase all thought of the fees he receives from Thales every time he chats with contacts amassed during his political career?
Arbuthnot remains active in Conservative Friends of Israel. Earlier this month, he attended a discussion between the group and Ofir Akunis, Israel’s science minister and a hardline apologist for the theft of Palestinian land.

Devoted to drones

Going by Arbuthnot’s track record, it is highly unlikely that he availed of that occasion to scold Akunis. Arbuthnot has backed Israel’s acts of aggression and their enablers. At the time of the 2011 Arab uprisings, he effectively praised Hosni Mubarak, the Egyptian dictator, for his role in enforcing Israel’s blockade on Gaza.
The ghastly consequences of Mubarak’s orders were that Gaza’s inhabitants had no way of escaping Israel’s bombs during Operation Cast Lead, a major offensive two years earlier. Writing for the website Conservative Home, Arbuthnot ignored those consequences, while noting with apparent favor that Mubarak “kept the border [between Egypt and Gaza] secure.”
Arbuthnot’s support for Israel cannot be disentangled from his work on strengthening the weapons industry. He spent a total of nine years heading a key parliamentary committee on military issues. In that capacity, he tried to justify drones by contending that their operators had been unfairly maligned as “video gaming ‘warrior geeks.’”
That vote of confidence in remote-controlled killing machines probably did not go unnoticed by his current employer. Thales is developing a drone program known as Watchkeeper for the British Army. Another partner in that program is Elbit, the Israeli weapons giant.
Conservative Friends of Israel is also linked to Elbit. The lobby group’s erstwhile director, Stuart Polak, is a leading figure in a “political strategy” firm that numbers Elbit among its clients.
Like Arbuthnot, Polak joined the House of Lords in 2015. Last year, he was found to have arranged meetings between Priti Patel, then a British government minister, and a number of Israeli politicians without respecting official protocol.
Patel resigned her ministerial post amid the ensuing controversy, yet there were no repercussions for Polak – beyond some possible damage to his reputation.

Trip to Turkey

Polak and Arbuthnot both participated in a recent trip to Turkey, where they met Recep Tayyip Erdogan, the country’s president.
Hilal Kaplan, who wrote a puff piece on the visit for Istanbul newspaper the Daily Salah, observed that it took place following two lucrative weapons deals between Turkey and Britain. Kaplan did not spell out the British lords’ own connections to the arms industry or the pro-Israel lobby.
The lords appear to have been on their best behavior in Turkey, implicitly expressing their approval for its actions against Kurdish fighters in Syria. Their friendly gestures towards Erdogan are significant, considering that the Turkish president has posed as a defender of Palestinian rights.
As Polak is arguably Britain’s top pro-Israel lobbyist, it is hard to believe that he hasn’t briefed that state’s politicians or diplomats about his Turkish sojourn. It was financed by the Bosphorus Center for Global Affairs, an organization that monitors press coverage unfavorable to Erdogan.
The pro-Israel lobby in Britain is secretive about its precise activities, including its relationship to the arms industry. For all their talk about beacons of light, Israel’s supporters keep many things in the dark.

Turkish court sentences six journalists to life, frees another pending trial


Deniz Yucel still faces up to 18 years in jail as Berlin says it has not agreed to 'dirty deals or other arrangements' to secure the release
German-Turkish journalist Deniz Yucel was detained in Turkey a year ago (Reuters)

 
Friday 16 February 2018

A Turkish court on Friday sentenced six journalists to life in jail on charges of aiding the network blamed for a failed coup in 2016, state media said.
Mehmet Altan, an economics professor and journalist, and his journalist brother Ahmet, were charged with giving coded messages in a television talk show a day before the abortive 15 July military coup. Nazli Ilicak, another veteran journalist, was also handed life imprisonment.
Three other defendants were also sentenced to life for trying to abolish the constitution and overthrow the government.
This isn't satire. Coded messages on TV. "Mehmet Altan, an economics professor and journalist, and his brother Ahmet were charged with giving coded messages in a television talkshow a day before the abortive 15 July military coup." https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/feb/16/turkey-sentences-six-journalists-life-imprisonment-failed-coup?CMP=share_btn_tw 

All six - Mehmet Altan, Ahmet Altan, Nazli Ilicak, Fevzi Yazici, Yakup Simsek and Sukru Tugrul Ozsengul - were convicted of "resorting to force to topple Turkey's constitutional order".
Turkey's constitutional court had previously ordered the Altan brothers not be held in custody while a verdict was pending. The top court said it was not ruling on the details of the case but on trial procedure.
A seventh person - Tibet Murat Sanliman - not in custody, was acquitted.
“Today’s verdict and sentences of life without parole for Ahmet Altan, Mehmet Altan and Nazli Ilicak mark an apex of the disintegration of the rule of law in Turkey,” Sarah Clarke, policy and advocacy manager for PEN International, tweeted. “This sets a devastating precedent for scores of other journalists charged with similarly groundless charges.”
Turkey should reverse the decision to jail the journalists for life, the UN and OSCE experts on media freedom said in a joint statement.
“These harsh sentences are an unacceptable and unprecedented assault on freedom of expression and on the media in Turkey,” David Kaye and Harlem Desir said in a joint statement issued by the UN human rights office. 

German-Turkish journalist freed

Separately on Friday, German-Turkish journalist Deniz Yucel, who was detained in Turkey a year ago, has been indicted for alleged security offences but a court has decided to release him pending trial, state-run Turkish news agency Anadolu said on Friday.
Die Welt, the German newspaper for which he works, had reported earlier in the day that Yucel had been freed, citing his lawyer. A German government spokeswoman confirmed the news, which could ease some of the tensions between the NATO allies.
'I believe that this will lead to (Yucel) being able to leave the country... I hope this will happen very soon'
- Sigmar Gabriel, German Foreign Minister 
Anadolu said a Turkish court has accepted an indictment seeking up to 18 years in jail for Yucel on charges of "spreading terrorist propaganda" and "stirring enmity" and opted to free him ahead of trial.
German Foreign Minister Sigmar Gabriel said he believed the 44-year-old Yucel would be able to leave Turkey.
"I believe that this will lead to (Yucel) being able to leave the country," Gabriel told reporters in Munich. "I hope this will happen very soon."
Just hours later, Yucel left Istanbul on a German government plane, an AFP correspondent said. There were no details about where he was heading. 
Yucel was jailed in February last year on suspicion of spreading propaganda in support of a terrorist organisation and inciting violence. He denies the accusations.
"Finally! Best news ever. Deniz Yucel is free," German Justice Minister Heiko Maas said in a tweet.
Government spokeswoman Ulrike Demmer said during a regular news conference on Friday that the release would be "an important first step" after massive diplomatic efforts.
A foreign ministry spokesman said there were still contentious issues between Germany and Turkey, whose ties deteriorated after Ankara's crackdown on suspected supporters of a failed military coup in 2016.
Yucel's case has become the focus of particular attention for Germany.
The spokeswoman said that Berlin had not agreed to any "dirty deals or other arrangements" to secure the release.
Turkish Prime Minister Binali Yildirim, who met Chancellor Angela Merkel for talks in Berlin on Thursday, earlier this week had raised the prospect that Yucel could soon be freed.
Turkey says its crackdown since the coup attempt – with the arrest of some 50,000 people - is needed for security reasons. It has criticised Germany for not handing over asylum seekers it accuses of involvement in the failed coup.
In January, Turkey urged Germany, its biggest trading partner and NATO ally, to mend fences and they have since resumed bilateral government consultations that were suspended after Yucel's arrest.