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

Wednesday, December 12, 2018

Washington Wants Pyongyang to Choose: Humanitarian Aid or Nukes

The United States is hampering some aid groups from fighting tuberculosis and other diseases in North Korea.

Children gather around a stainless steel can of soy milk at a day care in Tongchon, North Korea, on Dec. 3. (John Lehmann for First Steps)Children gather around a stainless steel can of soy milk at a day care in Tongchon, North Korea, on Dec. 3. (John Lehmann for First Steps)

No automatic alt text available.
BY -
DECEMBER 12, 2018, 11:59 AM The administration of U.S. President Donald Trump is restricting some international relief agencies from delivering humanitarian assistance to needy North Koreans, in the latest effort to compel Pyongyang to dismantle its nuclear arms program.

In recent months, U.S. diplomats have delayed the export of surgical equipment and supplies for fighting tuberculosis and malaria to North Korea, and held up the delivery from Canada of 300 stainless steel soy-milk cans for day care centers and orphanages there, according to several diplomatic sources and internal United Nations documents.

The measures, which the United States is channeling through the U.N. Security Council committee responsible for monitoring sanctions on North Korea, appears to be part of Washington’s maximum pressure campaign against North Korean leader Kim Jong Un’s regime.

In recent months, the State Department has also restricted visas for American aid workers seeking to work in Pyongyang, while the Treasury Department has imposed cumbersome licensing requirements on private charities that work with North Koreans.

At the United Nations, the United States has routinely blocked or delayed for months the delivery of medical supplies and water sanitation equipment and prevented charities from supporting food and agricultural infrastructure programs.

Last month, a top official at U.N. Children’s Fund, or UNICEF, warned that its operations in North Korea “may be compromised” if vital equipment, including solar water pumps that supply fresh water in hospitals for drug-resistant tuberculosis patients, isn’t approved on “an urgent basis.”

“All these items are critical to UNICEF’s humanitarian activities in [North Korea],” Omar Abdi, UNICEF’s deputy Executive Director wrote in a confidential November 30 letter to the U.N. sanctions committee.

The International Federation of the Red Cross (IFRC) has been seeking for more than two months to persuade the United States to lift a hold on equipment needed to ensure that clinics which provide anti-tuberculosis tablets have clean water to wash them down.

“We are providing very basic medical equipment, which we can monitor and hand to a little clinic with confidence it can’t be diverted,” said Richard Blewitt, the IFRC’s head of delegation and permanent observer to the U.N. He said that water taps and kidney trays are among the items being held up by the United States.

In December 2017, the Trump administration secured U.N. Security Council support for a resolution sanctioning North Korea in retaliation for its launch of an intercontinental ballistic missile. The sanctions resolution—which targeted Pyongyang’s energy and export sectors—allowed exemptions for the delivery of humanitarian aid, as long as it was approved by Security Council sanctions committee.

A set of guidelines drawn up by the sanctions committee in August to expedite the approval of humanitarian goods states that the sanctions “are not intended to have adverse humanitarian consequences for the civilian population of [North Korea] or to affect negatively or restrict those activities, including economic activities and cooperation, food aid and humanitarian assistance, that are not prohibited.”

Under questioning from diplomatic colleagues, U.S. officials acknowledged that Washington had imposed a tougher policy for humanitarian assistance. According to the new terms, the United States is only approving medications and other life-saving aid used to prevent the spread of infectious diseases like tuberculosis (TB) and malaria. But infrastructure projects that improve hygiene at clinics that treat TB patients have faced higher hurdles for approval. Delays have increased from weeks to months.

Outgoing U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations Nikki Haley devised the U.S. position and U.S. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo endorsed it, according to diplomatic sources. Pompeo is the driving force behind the U.S. maximum pressure campaign on North Korea.

“Where we needed to send medicines and life solutions … we have done that, and we will continue to do that,” Haley told reporters outside the U.N. Security Council on November 8. But she said U.S. officials were taking their time to carefully vet all exemption requests to ensure aid is not being diverted for other purposes.

Another U.S. official laid the blame on Pyongyang, saying North Korea faced a “protracted humanitarian crisis” because Kim’s regime “continues to use its own resources to finance its WMD program and military weapons rather than provide for the basic welfare of its citizens.”

The government could meet the entire cost of the United Nations’ $111 million humanitarian appeal by redirecting funds from its nuclear and weapons programs, the official said.

“The only way to resolve the humanitarian crisis is for the regime to join the community of nations, begin to respect human rights, invest in the well-being of its people instead of illicit activities, and adhere to international standards for access and monitoring of humanitarian assistance.”

The United States recently lifted its hold on millions of dollars worth of goods from the U.N. Children’s Fund, or UNICEF, to fight TB and malaria, and from the Eugene Bell Foundation, which supports programs that combat drug-resistant tuberculosis.

The foundation first requested an exemption in February, 2018, but resubmitted its request in September to meet the U.N. Security Council guidelines. The committee approved some of the supplies on November 29.

Dr. Stephen Linton, the founder of the Bell Foundation, welcomed the committee decision. He added that he is “not aware of any evidence that this administration has denied genuine tuberculosis aid,” he said.

But UNICEF and other relief agencies insisted that the approval delays for relief supplies was undercutting the battle against infectious diseases.

The sanctions committee continues to prohibit the import of a range of vital equipment, from supplies for water and sanitation and health projects to ambulances and spare parts for vehicles, according to UNICEF.

“The spare parts for vehicles are essential to ensure that such vehicles are able to reliably distribute tuberculosis and malaria medications and monitor programming,” Abdi wrote.

The failure to approve the UNICEF ambulances, he added, will prevent some 33,000 children under 5 years old and 7,000 pregnant women in remote communities gain “reliable access to basic health care.” Access to safe drinking water for another 50,000 vulnerable North Koreans “would  be significantly hindered” if the committee continues to block the delivery of critical supplies, Abdi wrote.

The U.S. position has left Washington politically isolated, and provided China and Russia, which favor an easing of sanctions on North Korea, with an opportunity to highlight what they claim is a callous American policy. Sweden and several other countries have been particularly outspoken about the need to relax restrictions on aid deliveries, while even stalwart American allies like Britain and France have urged the United States to ease up, particularly on items that promote health.

“There are certainly council members who think the U.S. had gone too far on their blocking and holding of some of the humanitarian exemption requests,” said a Security Council diplomat.

The U.S. strategy has been a particular burden on American charities because U.S. officials have denied their aid workers permission to travel to North Korea, according to reports in the Wall Street Journal and the New York Times. In March, the Treasury Department issued a new regulation requiring private charities to be licensed if they had “partnerships and partnership agreements” with the North Korean government, hampering their ability to work.

But the impact on non-American charities has also been considerable.

In late October, the Canadian government made a request for a humanitarian exemption on behalf of First Steps, a Vancouver-based Christian charity, to send 300 soy-milk cans to North Korea,
according to internal diplomatic emails reviewed by Foreign Policy. When the sanctions committee chair asked council members to approve the shipment, the United States requested a two-week delay in responding.



“In all honesty this would all be hilarious if it wasn’t so sad,” Susan Ritchie, the founder and executive director of First Steps, told FP. “These items are exclusively used to provide soy milk to some of the most vulnerable children in the world.”

The United States also held up deliveries from Concern WorldWide of Ireland and Italy’s Agrotec Spa company, which supplies tractors and spare parts under a European Union food security program, according to a report last month by the French news agency Agence France-Presse.

Robert Mardini, the U.N.-based representative for the International Committee of the Red Cross, which has a small program in North Korea, said that U.N. sanctions more broadly have hampered international relief efforts. Indeed, even China, which favors an easing of sanctions, has vigorously enforced them, turning back shipments of aid because they included banned metals. In January, Chinese customs officials blocked a delivery from Christian Friends of Korea, a U.S.-based charity, because it included nail clippers.

Mardini said U.N. banking sanctions are preventing his organization from transferring money to North Korea to fund a series of programs designed to improve sanitation and dispose of ordnance from the Korean War. He called for “humanitarian assistance in [North Korea] to be depoliticized and for the sanctions regime to continue to provide timely response for submission by humanitarian actors, including the ICRC.”

In a November 7 letter to President Trump, Edward Markey, the Democratic U.S. Senator from Massachusetts, said he was “deeply troubled” by the American restrictions.

Markey said that the U.S. Treasury Department requirements are so onerous that simple tasks now take months to complete and often require help from attorneys.

“The humanitarian situation in North Korea is far too dire for these draconian policies. The United Nations estimates that 60,000 children are at risk of starvation, and cases of drug-resistant tuberculosis—if left untreated—threaten to spread with devastating effect throughout the country and potentially into neighboring states,” he said.
 
Colum Lynch is Foreign Policy’s award-winning U.N.-based senior diplomatic reporter. @columlynch

Climate change talks result in renewed pledge to cut emissions

EU, Canada, New Zealand and developing countries to keep global warming below 1.5C
The Katowice talks are centred on raising countries’ level of ambition to counter climate change. Photograph: Fehim Demir/EPA

 and  in Katowice-

The EU and scores of developing countries have pledged to toughen their existing commitments to reduce greenhouse gas emissions to enable the world to stay within a 1.5C rise in global warming.
The promise, which follows increasingly dire scientific warnings, was the most positive message yet to come from the ongoing talks in Poland.

The announcement came at the end of a day in which the UN secretary general made an impassioned intervention to rescue the talks, which have been distracted by US, Russian and Saudi moves to downgrade scientific advice.

“We’re running out of time,” António Guterres told the plenary. “To waste this opportunity would compromise our last best chance to stop runaway climate change. It would not only be immoral, it would be suicidal.”

The talks have centred on devising a rulebook for implementing the 2015 Paris agreement and raising countries’ level of ambition to counter climate change, but progress has been slow on several key issues and divisions have emerged between four fossil fuel powers – the US, Russia, Saudi Arabia and Kuwait – and the rest of the world.

The UN believes China could play a stronger role in the absence of leadership from the US. Sources said Guterres would make a telephone call to Xi to ask for his help in nudging talks forward.
The EU also wants China, which is a key member of the block of 77 developing countries, to step up to ensure that countries all follow the same rules in being transparent over their greenhouse gas emissions.

Campaigners praised the decision by the High Ambition Coalition group of countries, made up of the EU and four other developed countries, including Canada and New Zealand, as well as the large grouping of least developed countries and several other developing nations, to scale up their emissions-cutting efforts in line with a 1.5C temperature rise limit.

Wendel Trio, director of the Climate Action Network Europe, said: “The spirit of Paris is back. The statement will boost greater ambition at the crunch time of these so far underwhelming talks. For the EU this must mean a commitment to significantly increase its 2030 target by 2020, even beyond the 55% reduction some member states and the European parliament are calling for. We call upon the countries that have not signed the statement so far to stop ignoring the science.”

Guterres, in a pointed criticism aimed at the four countries that have been refusing to “welcome” the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change’s special report on 1.5-degree warming, said rejecting climate science was indefensible.

He added: “The IPCC special report is a stark acknowledgment of what the consequences of global warming beyond 1.5 degrees will mean for billions of people around the world, especially those who call small island states home. This is not good news, but we cannot afford to ignore it.”

Frank Bainimarama, the prime minister of Fiji and the outgoing chair of COP23, amplified Guterres’ message. He told delegates they risked going down in history as “the generation that blew it – that sacrificed the health of our world and ultimately betrayed humanity because we didn’t have the courage and foresight to go beyond our short-term individual concerns: craven, irresponsible and selfish”.

Al Gore at the COP24 UN climate change conference 2018 in Katowice, Poland. Photograph: Agencja Gazeta/Reuters

The former US vice-president Al Gore told delegates they faced “the single most important moral choice in history of humanity”.

Behind the scenes, delegates said there had been strong progress on finance thanks to a doubling of commitments by Germany and Norway to help poorer nations adapt to climate change and build institutions capable of monitoring emissions. Nicholas Stern, the author of a landmark review on the economics of climate change, praised “the level of ideas and cooperation”.

But others said there were still many disputed brackets in the negotiating text on transparency and other elements of the rulebook.

“There has been some progress, but it’s a very worrying time. There is still a lot more on the table than we hoped for at this stage,” said Helen Mountford, vice-president of the World Resources Institute. “The secretary general is coming in to make sure this COP can land in a good place. He will hold a summit next year to raise ambitions. If he wants success there, then here we need a robust rulebook and clear signals on ambition and finance.”

Janos Pasztor, the former climate adviser to Ban Ki-moon, told the Guardian that Guterres was doing the right thing by intervening at a crucial stage. “He needs to make clear what the IPCC has described as a major challenge, and that we have to deliver on that,” he said.

Pasztor added: “We are talking about the need for massive emissions reductions, that have to happen now, not in the future. It is very daunting. The secretary general has reminded the world of what is at stake, and the political significance of that.”

The contrasts with the Paris climate summit, in terms of the political atmosphere, were striking. David Levaï, who was part of the French government team that helped to broker the successful 2015 conference, said the geopolitical winds were far less favourable today. Globally, the rise of nationalists such as Donald Trump in the US and Jair Bolsonaro in Brazil has tilted power towards fossil fuel and agribusiness interests.

He said: “In the year before Paris, all countries made clear that they wanted an agreement. Now, there are repeated attacks on multilateralism, and this has empowered groups that take negative actions.”
Levaï, who is at the Institute for Sustainable Development and International Relations, expressed hope that the secretary general might make a difference. “The fact that he has come back shows he feels a need to whip countries into order,” he said.

There has been some criticism of the pro-coal government of Poland for failing to press governments to raise their ambitions. But it joined Fiji as co-chair of the Talanoa phase of the negotiations to issue a call for action that recognised the importance of the 1.5C report as the basis for more urgency and ambition.

“The window for action is closing fast. We need to do more and we need to do it now,” said the document, which would form part of the official statement from this conference.

How to build resilient cities without wrecking the environment


By  - 
While the ocean is the focus, urbanisation is the main reason for the rising temperatures and water pollution. Yet it receives little attention in this discussion.
In turn, rising temperatures increase downpours and urban floods, adding to the pressures on urban infrastructure.

Protecting the reef as Cairns grows

Cairns is an expanding Queensland city located between two World Heritage sites – the Great Barrier Reef and the Daintree Rainforest.
While important research focuses on these sites themselves, not much is known about how the surrounding urban areas influence these natural environments.
Similarly, little is known about how urban planning and design contribute to the health of the inner city and surrounding water bodies, including the ocean.
Cairns is a major Australian tourism destination with a unique coastal setting of rainforest and reef. This attracts growing numbers of visitors. One effect of this success is increased urbanisation to accommodate these tourists.
There are many opportunities to promote sustainable and socially acceptable growth in Cairns. Yet this growth is not without challenges. These include:
  • impacts of climate change, including sea-level rise and ocean warming
  • lack of comprehensive urban infrastructure strategy
  • lack of comprehensive assessment of the benefits of integrated urban design to maximise coastal resilience and the health of streams and oceans.
As with most Australian cities, Cairns has an urban layout based on wide streets, mostly with little or no greenery. Rain gardens, for instance, are rare. Bioswales that slow and filter stormwater are present along highways, but seldom within the city.
The arguments for not adding greenery to the urban environment are familiar.
These typically relate to costs of implementation and maintenance, but also to the speed with which water is taken out of streets during the tropical rainy season. This is because green stormwater solutions, if not well planned, can slow down the water flow, thus increasing floods.
However, cities can be designed in a way to imitate nature with solutions that are an integral part of the urban system. This can include dedicated areas of larger wetlands and parks, which capture water and filter pollution and undesired nutrients more efficiently, reducing polluted runoff to the reef.

Integrated urban design

Integrated urban design is an aspect of city planning and design that could be further developed to ensure the whole system works more efficiently.
This involves integrating the three elements that make up urban infrastructure:
  1. the green – parks, residential gardens, rain gardens, green roofs and walls, bioswales, etc
  2. the grey – built drains, footpaths, buildings, underground vacuum system, etc
  3. the blue – streams, stormwater systems, etc
urban-1b
A rain garden, which absorbs rain and stores water to help control run-off from impervious hard surfaces, in Wellington, New Zealand. Source: Karine Dupré/The Conversation
Urban infrastructure, therefore, can and should be planned and designed to provide multiple services, including coastal resilience and healthier water streams and oceans.
To achieve this, a neighbourhood or city-wide strategy needs to be implemented, instead of intermittent and ad hoc urban design solutions.
Importantly, each element should coordinate with the others to avoid overlaps, gaps and pitfalls.
This is what integrated urban design is about. So why don’t we implement it more often?

Challenges and opportunities

Research has shown that planning, designing and creating climate-resilient cities that are energy-optimised, revitalise urban landscapes and restore and support ecosystem services is a major challenge at the planning scale.
To generate an urban environment that promotes urban protection and resilience while minimising urbanisationimpacts and restoring natural systems, we need to better anticipate the risks and have the means to take actions.
In other words, it is a two-way system: well planned and designed green and blue infrastructures not only deliver better urbanised areas but will also protect the ocean from pollution.
Additionally, it helps to manage future risks of severe weather.
Furthermore, the lack of inter- and transdisciplinary approaches results in disciplinary barriers in research and policymaking to long-term planning of the sort that generates urban green infrastructure and its desired outcomes.
On the bright side, there is also strong evidence to suggest sound policy can help overcome these barriers through technical guides based on scientific research, standards and financial incentives.
Collaborative partnerships are promising, too. Partnerships between academia and industry tend to be more powerful than streamlined industry project developments.
urban-2
Cairns Esplanade Lagoon helps raise awareness of the need to protect the ocean as the city grows. Source: Karine Dupré/The Conversation
Melbourne’s urban forest strategy has been internationally acclaimed. Examples like these provide valuable insights into local green infrastructure governance.
Cairns has stepped up with some stunning blue infrastructure on the Esplanade which raises awareness of both locals and visitors about the protection of our oceans.
This is only the start. Together academics, local authorities, industry stakeholders and communities can lead the way to resilient cities and healthier oceans.
By Silvia Tavares, Lecturer in Urban Design, James Cook University and Karine Dupré, Associate Professor in Architecture, Griffith UniversityThis article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. 

Organ donors to be asked if they are religious


organ donation leaflets

12 December 2018
People who join the NHS's UK organ donation register are to be asked if they want their religious beliefs to be considered in the donation process.
The question aims to reassure people that donation can take place in line with their faith or beliefs.
It is hoped the measure can help to boost the low proportion of donors from black and Asian backgrounds.
Research has found religious and cultural beliefs are the main barrier to organ donation in these communities.
Last year, 42% of black and Asian families agreed to donate their relative's organs, compared with 66% of families from the overall population.
More than a third of patients waiting for a kidney transplant are from black, Asian and other minority ethnic communities and often their best chance of a match will come from someone of the same ethnic background.
A part of the shortage of donors is caused by people from these backgrounds choosing not to donate.
But even if a person does choose to donate by signing up to the register, families have the final say on whether their organs should be used.

'Someone should be helped by our loss'


Bimla Parmar and her husband Dalbagh
NHS BLOOD AND TRANSPLANTImage captionBimla Parmar became an organ donor after she died

Bimla Parmar, a Sikh who lived in Hayes, west London, became a lifesaving organ donor when she died of a brain haemorrhage, aged 68, after collapsing at home.
Her daughter, Gurpreet Parmar, 39, said: "My mum was not on the NHS organ donation register but my siblings and I were fine with it as we believed someone else should be helped by our loss.
"I personally had registered to be a donor a long time ago as I want to help someone else once I am gone.
"Mum was religious and loved by everyone. She was able to donate her lungs, kidneys and liver to four people.
"I hope more of my generation and younger people educate the elders to sign up to donate and explain what their gift can mean to a family seeing their loved one struggle on a daily basis."

'Priceless gift'

People signing up to the register will now be asked whether or not they want their faith or beliefs to be discussed with their family or anyone else they consider appropriate, such as a faith leader.
NHS Blood and Transplant, the organisation that runs the NHS organ donation register, said this would enable nurses to discuss concerns about the process with families, such as whether a burial would be delayed.
Jackie Doyle-Price, Minister for Inequalities, said: "Organ donation is a priceless gift but thousands of people are still waiting for a transplant and we must do all we can to remove the barriers that prevent people from signing up as a donor.
"This important update will give people the confidence that when they register a decision to donate their organs, their beliefs will always be considered."
The new question will be added to the register on Thursday.

Tuesday, December 11, 2018

Tamil families of disappeared mark Human Rights Day with protest for justice

Tamil families of the disappeared gathered in Mullaitivu on Monday, where they marked Human Rights Day with a protest demanding justice and accountability.
 10 December 2018
Families from across 5 different districts in the North gathered in Mullaitivu, where they handed over a petition with their demands.
Relatives of the disappeared took to the streets more than 643 days ago across the North-East, calling for answers on the whereabouts of their loved ones. Whilst demonstrators have met with several government officials, including Sri Lankan president Maithripala Sirisena who pledged to meet their demands, none have been met.

Four parameters of a political solution at this time



by Jehan Perera- 

The country being on the verge of a imminent division due to envisaged constitutional reform was one of the main justifications of the backdoor seizure of power of October 26 by members of the hitherto opposition who are now members of the government. The threat they alleged came from the constitutional reform process. This is a process that has been continuing since the former government got elected in 2015, though it is now at a standstill due the political crisis. The key elements of this constitutional reform process, which was envisaged to culminate in a new constitution, have been to change the executive presidential system, obtain a new electoral system to replace the current one which is based on proportional representation, and to ensure a more effective devolution of power as a solution to the grievances of the ethnic minorities in general and to the Tamil people in particular.

The attempt to utilize the ethnic conflict, which resulted in three decades of armed insurrection and civil war, to fan fear and hatred amongst the communities, is one of the most unfortunate and crude features of the present political debate. International Trade Minister Bandula Gunawardena has exemplified this longstanding approach to national politics. He is reported to have appealed to President Maithripala Sirisena who is commander-in-chief of the armed forces to preserve national security as the country is under threat of being divided at the present time. Even though the war is over nearly 10 years, and the LTTE no more exists as a military presence, he is reported to have justified Prime Minister Rajapaksa’s acceptance of the prime minister’s position under controversial circumstances as being to prevent the constitutional reform process going ahead and causing the country to disintegrate.

On the Sunday when the International Trade Minister was making his extremely parochial speech in a place of religious worship, I was with students of the University of Ruhunu in the Southern Province. If the 50 students and two faculty members of the university were in any way representative of the Sri Lankan people, and its younger generation, then the present political crisis has led people to gain a keener appreciation of what is rational and internationally accepted. They were participants in a three-day workshop on dealing with the country’s divided past and facing the future together. The workshop included issues of accountability and constitutional reform that could address the roots of the conflict. The fact that this discussion could take place in the heartland of ancient Sinhalese nationalism speaks for the sanity and rationality of the younger generation despite the crude attempts made to generate fear and hatred of the other.

APPRECIATING PRESIDENT

Since that fateful October 26, when President Maithripala Sirisena sacked Prime Minister Ranil Wickremesinghe and plunged the polity into crisis, Sri Lanka has not had a stable government. At the present time the Court of Appeal has suspended the functioning of the prime minister and his ministers and deputy ministers who have suffered two successive no-confidence motions against them in parliament and still did not wish to gracefully step down. Despite the absence of a fully fledged government, there has been a remarkable degree of stability and sobriety in society, so much so that people are beginning to say that it is better to have a government without all these ministers than to have them back as a burden to both the people and to the government treasury.

At least part of the credit for the stability that the country currently enjoys, and the spirit of freedom that continues to prevail in the form of a plethora of people’s protests and symbolic actions, needs to rest with President Sirisena who is commander-in-chief of the armed forces. He has ensured that the security forces and police act within the law as protectors of those who protest and not as oppressors who quell those who protest against their masters. The president’s negative points in terms of his lack of political judgment and the wavering stances he takes on many issue must not detract from the light touch with which two governments under him have so far dealt with those who oppose the government. Along with his erstwhile partner as Prime Minister, Ranil Wickremesinghe, President Sirisena was also a force for good in supporting national reconciliation initiatives that have seen land being returned by the military to the people, the Tamil version of the national anthem being sung on Independence Day and the setting up of the Office of Missing Persons.

Some of the president’s actions seem to be based on the advice that his powers as president are virtually unlimited. Despite this incorrect and undemocratic advice, he has respected the role of the military and not deployed it for purposes of civilian control. Although the judiciary not too long ago curtailed his ambition to be president for an additional year, he accepted that verdict and now in the face of the judiciary denying him the power to dissolve parliament short of four and a half years, he has said that he will respect its decisions even though he may not agree with them.

He has been part of government initiatives over the past three years that have visibly strengthened the role of independent institutions, including the judiciary. On the whole therefore President Sirisena’s contribution to transforming the country in the past three years needs to be appreciated.

ANOTHER TERM

President Sirisena has another year to go before his term ends. As president he continues to wield tremendous power, not least because he is commander-in-chief of the armed forces and minister in charge of both the military and police. He is continuing to refuse to re-appoint as Prime Minister Ranil Wickremesinghe even though the majority of parliamentarians have said that is what they want, and are going to show that majority again when parliament meets next. It appears that the president is being driven into a corner by those who support him and by those who oppose him. There is even speculation that in these circumstances the president may be impeached. If such a situation is to arise the president’s reaction with the powers at his disposal is unpredictable as has been many of his other decisions.

It is believed most widely that President Sirisena is deeply concerned about his future once his term of office as president ends in December next year. There are many who could wish to take him to task. In this context, the parameters of a possible solution that will support the principles of freedom, human rights and inter-ethnic reconciliation become clearer. The draft constitution that the International Trade Minister claimed will divide the country, envisages a reformed presidency in which presidential powers are reduced and the president will be elected by parliament as in India and not by the people. Such a position could be an accommodation to President Sirisena who is unlikely to be elected again by the national electorate as a result of his unstable political behavior over the past month, which has earned him public disapproval on all sides of the political and ethnic divides.

The other elements of the political solution, formulated on win-win considerations, would be as follows. Second, for the president to reinstate Prime Minister Ranil Wickremesinghe as demanded by the parliamentary majority. Third, for the president to join with Prime Minister Wickremesinghe to amend the constitution to enable the strengthening of devolution of power which is a demand of the ethnic minorities, in particular the Tamil community. Fourth, to dissolve parliament at the request of parliament itself and hold fresh general elections as demanded by the former president. Such a political solution could satisfy the main interests of the three main parties to the present conflict, while keeping in mind that the problems of the ethnic minorities need to be more fully addressed without delay after the elections.


Petition Seeking Writ Of Mandamus Directing An Inquiry Into Maithripala Sirisena’s Mental Health

logo
A writ petition has been filed in the Court of Appeal seeking a mandate in the nature of a writ of Mandamus against IGP Pujith Jayasundara and the Fort Police HQ OIC directing them to institute judicial proceedings in district courts by virtue of section 2 of the Mental Diseases Ordinance for the purpose of inquiring state of mind of President Maithripala Sirisena.
Maithripala Sirisena
A person by the name of Thakshila Jayawardena has filed the petition as a matter of “public interest.”
Speaking to the media from the Huftsdorp courts complex this evening, Counsel Sisira Kumara Siriwardena, a lawyer representing Jaywardena said many citizens in the country had already come to the conclusion that President Siriena was suffering from a mental disability.
He said there were three possible reasons to suspect that Sirisena was suffering from a mental disability including A) The stress stemming from his natural inability to meet the demand of the job B) A history of mental health issues in the family C) Inability to cope with the stresses stemming from the arrest of I.K. Mahanama, the President’s former Chief of Staff, over a bribery charge.
Siriwardena also said Sirisena’s biography, written by his daughter Chathurika Sirisena, indicated that the President had a “family history” when it came to mental health issues.
He said the President can only enjoy his immunity only if he is of sound mind. “If he is suffering from a mental disability he can no longer enjoy presidential immunity.”

Read More