Wednesday, April 10, 2019

The young man who was radicalised until Prevent prised him away from the far-right extremists

Darshna Soni-10 Apr 2019Home Affairs Correspondent

The far right poses a terrorist threat and is being under-estimated. These are the words of a former member of an extreme right-wing group who is now working for a government scheme which aims to de-radicalise people.

We have been speaking to one young man who was groomed as a schoolboy by extremists.

APAC to spend nearly $30b on protecting against cyberattacks

000_1CH8Z5-940x580 — People work on computers on January 22, 2019 in Lille, during the 11th International Cybersecurity Forum. The International Cybersecurity Forum will be held on January 22 and 23 in Lille. Source: Philippe Hugen/AFP

@SoumikRoy-10 Apr 2019

CYBERSECURITY has been a challenge for most businesses this past year.

Every quarter has been more challenging than the next — with organisations battling one incident after another. Naturally, they’re keen on spending more to boost security against bad actors.

From Cathay Pacific to Mariott to Boeing, we’ve seen hacks across a diverse range of industries and company sizes in the past.

This has definitely caused significant challenges for businesses in the market, and companies seem to want to do everything in their power to prevent more of these in the future.

According to the latest IDC spending guide, the Asia Pacific (APAC) companies will invest up to US$16 billion in security-related hardware, software, and services, an increase of 20 percent over the previous year.

IDC expects investment on security-related products and services to grow at a five-year CAGR of 20.1 percent over the forecast period (2017-22) and reach USD 28.2 billion by 2022.

“For too long, business leaders were underinvesting in this category. We see this changing lately but a bit late to be able to find the needed skills in the market, hence the incremental growth expected in the services segment,” said IDC VP for Security and Blockchain Research Simon Piff.

“Governments prioritising this as part of their agenda is good, but it could also be backed by better legislation in many markets.”

Spending on security not limited to software alone

IDC believes that security-related services will be both the largest (US$6.5 billion in 2019) and the fastest growing (23.8 percent CAGR) category of APEJ security spending.

Managed security services are expected to be the largest segment within the services category, delivering more than 46 percent of the technology category throughout the forecast (2017-22).

Security hardware will the second largest category with a 36.2 percent share of the overall security spend in 2019.

In fact, analysts forecast that network security hardware will be the largest hardware segment throughout the forecast period.

Software spends are expected to account for 23.0 percent of the overall security spend in 2019 and might grow at five-year CAGR of 12.2 percent during 2017-22.

Looking into the industries that demand security

IDC’s analysts believe that the banking industry will make the largest investment in security solutions. Spends this year will total US$2.4 billion and grow to US$4.2 billion by 2022.

Primarily, this growth will be led by managed security services and network security that account for more than half of the industry’s spend throughout the forecast.

With pressure from the government and customers to combat threats targeting customer accounts and IT infrastructure mounting, the industry seems to be in a rush to spend on solutions specifically designed to protect them in the event of an attack.

Following this, telecommunications and federal and central government are the other two shaping industries, representing a 23.2 percent share of the overall security spend in 2019.

The industries that will see the fastest growth in security spending will be state/local governments (23.7 percent CAGR) and resource industries (22.2 percent CAGR), according to IDC.

This article originally appeared on our sister site Tech Wire Asia.

Vehicle pollution 'results in 4m child asthma cases a year'

Equivalent of 11,000 new cases a day occur worldwide due to toxic air from traffic, researchers say

A baby with respiratory disease at a hospital in Beijing. ‘Governments must act now to protect children’, one expert said. Photograph: China Daily/REUTERS

Damian Carrington @dpcarrington-Wed 10 Apr 2019

Four million children develop asthma every year as a result of air pollution from cars and trucks, equivalent to 11,000 new cases a day, a landmark study has found.

Most of the new cases occur in places where pollution levels are already below the World Health Organization limit, suggesting toxic air is even more harmful than thought.

The damage to children’s health is not limited to China and India, where pollution levels are particularly high. In UK and Australian cities, the researchers blame traffic pollution for three-quarters of all new childhood asthma cases.

Canada has the third highest rate of new traffic-related asthma cases among the 194 nations analysed, while Los Angeles and New York City are in the top 10 worst cities out of the 125 assessed. Children are especially vulnerable to toxic air and exposure is also known to leave them with stunted lungs.
The research, published in the journal Lancet Planetary Health, is the first global assessment of the impact of traffic fumes on childhood asthma based on high-resolution pollution data.

“Our findings suggest that millions of new cases of paediatric asthma could be prevented by reducing air pollution,” said Prof Susan Anenberg, at George Washington University in the US. Asthma can cause deadly seizures.

The key pollutant, nitrogen dioxide, is produced largely by diesel vehicles, many of which emit far more than allowed on the road even after the Dieselgate scandal. “Improving access to cleaner forms of transport, like electrified public transport, cycling and walking, would reduce asthma, enhance physical fitness, and cut greenhouse gas emissions,” said Anenberg.

“This landmark study shows the massive global burden of asthma in children caused by traffic pollution,” said Prof Chris Griffiths, at Queen Mary University of London and the co-director of the Asthma UK Centre for Applied Research, who was not part of the research team. “Asthma is only one of the multiple adverse effects of pollution on children’s health. Governments must act now to protect children.”

The new study combined detailed NO2 pollution data with asthma incidence rates and population numbers. Many large studies have already shown a strong link between traffic pollution and childhood asthma and that pollution causes damaging inflammation. This data on risks was used to calculate the number of new cases around the world.

“From the weight of evidence, there is likely a strong causal relationship between traffic pollution and childhood asthma incidence,” said Ploy Achakulwisut, also at George Washington University and the lead author of the new study. “So we can be confident that traffic pollution has a significant effect on childhood asthma incidence.”

The epidemiological evidence for NO2 being the key pollutant is the strongest. However, researchers cannot rule out that other pollutants also pumped out by vehicles, such as tiny particles, are also a factor as it is not possible to experiment directly on people.

“Childhood asthma has reached global epidemic proportions,” said Prof Rajen Naidoo, at the University of KwaZulu-Natal in South Africa, and not involved in the study. It indicates that one in eight of all new cases is due to traffic pollution. “An important outcome from this study is the evidence that the existing WHO standards are not protective against childhood asthma.”

The country with the highest national rate of childhood asthma attributed to traffic pollution is South Korea, with almost a third of all new cases blamed on vehicles. Japan and Belgium are in the top 10, along with six Middle Eastern nations, including Saudi Arabia.

Due to their high populations and pollution levels, the top three countries for the total number of new children getting asthma each year are China (760,000), India (350,000) and the US (240,000). The scientists said their research may underestimate the true levels in many poorer nations where asthma often goes undiagnosed.

“While it is important for parents to try to reduce individual exposure, maybe by avoiding highly congested roads as much as possible, not everyone can do this,” said Achakulwisut. “So it is important to call for policy initiatives to tackle pollution at city, state and national levels.”

“The good news is that a transition to zero-emission vehicles is already underway,” she said. Some countries and cities are pledging to phase out internal combustion engines and policies such as London’s new ultra-low emission zone are being rolled out. “But this transition needs to become global, and it needs to happen faster. Each year of delay jeopardises the health of millions of children worldwide.”

Penny Woods, chief executive of the British Lung Foundation, said: “We used to think the only real danger roads posed to children was the threat of a car accident. However now we can see there’s an equally deadly risk: breathing in air pollution. Rightly, there’s been a huge effort to reduce road accidents and we need to see an equal commitment to reducing toxic air.”

Mullaitivu families urge international community to deliver justice

190407 Mullaitivu FOD NH 4.jpg

08 April 2019

Families of the disappeared in Mullaitivu held a demonstration yesterday calling on the international community to deliver justice.

Gathering by the District Secretariat Office, families walked towards Vadduvakal bridge, the site where most of their families handed over their soon to be disappeared loved ones to the military.

Families reiterated their disappointment over the extension of a UN Human Rights Council resolution calling for a hybrid mechanism of transitional justice.

THE TWO ISSUES OF UTMOST IMPORTANCE TO SRI LANKA: GENEVA RESOLUTION & A NEW CONSTITUTION – R. SAMPANTHAN.

R .Sampanthan.

08/04/2019

As I have often stated earlier, the future of the country is not purely an economic issue. It is a very multifaceted issue. Even the future economy of the country is dependent upon several issues; it is dependent upon its unity and its strengths based upon the unity; it is dependent upon the reputation that it enjoys both domestically and internationally.

The two issues of utmost importance to the country today, in my view are; the implementation of the Resolution co-sponsored by the Sri Lankan Government and unanimously adopted by the United Nations Human Rights Council in 1915, 1917 and 1919; and the adoption of a new Constitution for the country as unanimously decided by Resolution adopted in this Parliament in 2016.

With regard to the first matter, the United Nations Human Rights Council Resolution is also based upon two investigations; the first, conducted by an independent panel appointed by the Secretary-General of the UN comprising of three experts from different parts of the world and the second, an investigation conducted by the UN Human Rights Council itself. Both have come to the conclusion that war crimes and crimes against humanity were committed, that there were violations against international humanitarian and human rights laws during the civil conflict and that the matter needs to be further investigated upon and determined.

Sri Lanka has conducted no investigation of any sort.

Sri Lanka has conducted no investigation of any sort, not even a domestic investigation and persists that it will not implement certain aspects of the UN Human Rights Council Resolution. From the point of view of Sri Lanka, there was only one report, the Report of the Lessons Learnt and Reconciliation Commission; even that Report has not yet been implemented. I have spoken on this civil conflict, Sir, in Parliament in 2009 and before that – the conflict came to an end in May 2009 – without being contradicted by the Government and in fact, not merely me, but many others – both those in this Parliament and other personalities – have referred to at least some of the matters that happened during the course of the conflict.

It is my intention, Sir, to make reference to some of these matters to demonstrate what was stated in this Parliament and by others at the time the conflict took place without any contradiction by the Government. I will read, Sir, from the position that I stated in Parliament in 21st January, 2009.

“What has been happening to the Tamil people as a result of the war that is being waged in the North and the East? There is constant aerial bombing, continuous aerial bombing, sometimes several bombings per day. There is constant multi-barrel rocket launcher fire, constant artillery fire, all into civilian populated areas. Is this happening in any part of the world? Are civilian- populated areas being bombed aerially and are multi-barrel rocket launchers and heavy artilleries being fired into civilian populated areas in any other part of the world? I got some statistics here. They are short of food; they are short of medicine; they are short of shelter; they are short of drinking water; they are short of sanitation facilities. People are undergoing immense difficulties in the Vanni. There are about 350,000 to 400,000 people now in the Mullaitivu District, in a part of the Mullaitivu District, running helter-skelter from one place to another depending on where the bombing is taking place, where the shelling is taking place.”

That was the position in this area when I spoke in this Parliament in January, 2009, a position which was not contradicted by the Government.

“Nobody knows what is happening in this area. There are no United Nations agencies in this area. There are no International Non-Governmental Organizaitons in the Vanni. They were all asked to get out of that place in September last year and since then, they are not stationed there permanently and they cannot act freely and independently as they wish. “

It is absolutely essential, that the truth must be ascertained.

So, Sir, that was the position that prevailed in the Vanni in 2018 and 2019.

So what do we see in the statements made by Madam Navanethem Pillay who was the Head of the UN Human Rights Commission at that point of time, the statement made by Madam Louise Arbour, who was also the Head of the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights a little earlier, and the statement made by Justice Bhagwati – the Chairman of the International Independent Group of Eminent Persons, a retired Chief Justice of India who was in Sri Lanka in order to assist in the investigations that have been conducted by the Udalagama Commissionin regard to several human rights violations. They have all made their position very clear, Sir, in the statements they have made.

Madam Navanethem Pillay said, Sir, “Certain actions being undertaken by the Sri Lankan military and by the LTTE may constitute violations of international human rights and humanitarian law. We need to know more about what is going on, but we know enough to be sure that the situation is absolutely desperate.” She went on to say, Sir,“Despite the Government’s designation of safe or ‘no fire’ zones for civilians, repeated shelling had continued in those zones. Other areas holding civilians had also been shelled, she claimed. Credible sources had indicated that more than 2,800 civilians may have been killed and more than 7,000 in these zones in the past few days. Even after the Government’s announcement on 24 February that heavy weapons would not be fired into the no-fire zones, close to 500 people were reportedly killed and more than a thousand injured in these areas.”

That is what Madam Navaneetham Pillay, High Commissioner for Human Rights had to say in regard to the situation in this area. There are limited quantities of food, reports of severe malnutrition, medicines are unavailable even in the one makeshift medical facility that is still functioning.

Madam Louise Arbour, Sir, was also the Commissioner for Human Rights in the UN. She urged the Government of Sri Lanka to establish in Sri Lanka an Office of the High Commission for Human Rights to be in a position to monitor what is happening in Sri Lanka. That was declined, refused, rejected and this is what she had to say. I quote”

“There was a culture of impunity which had so deeply permeated into the Sri Lankan society, that if we wanted to eradicate the culture of impunity, there was an urgent need to set up a human rights mechanism, a human rights office in Sri Lanka under UN auspices to monitor the human rights situation in Sri Lanka.”

Sir,that was the position expressed by Human Rights High Commissioners in regard to the situation prevalent in this area.

Justice Bhagwati, the Chairman of the International Independent Eminent Group of Persons (IIGEP) a renowned jurist, who had been responsible for extreme changes in India pertaining to human rights had this to say. I quote:

“Summary executions, massacres, disappearances, wanton destruction of property and forcible transfers of population can never be justified. No efforts should be spared to uncover responsibility, including recognition of command responsibility, for such actions. The International Independent Group of Eminent Persons has, however, found an absence of will on the part of the Government of Sri Lanka in the present inquiry to investigate cases with vigour, where the conduct of its own forces has been called into question”

This was the position, Sir, that was stated by the different persons of repute, who are international personalities.

The reason why I am reminding the House of these matters is that you cannot sweep everything under the carpet. Your current approach can do immense harm to this country. Much has been said about the fact that there is a complaint that 40,000 people have been killed and as to how that can be accepted. There were at least 350,000 people in this area, probably around 400,000 based on our own investigations, only 290,000 people came out. What happened to the balance? Your estimate was that there were only 60,000 to 70,000 people who lived in this area at this point of time. You sent food, medicine and other supplies only for that number – 60,000 or 70,000. When the number was as large as 350,000 why did you restrict the number to only 60,000 or 70,000?

We conducted our own investigation in regard to this matter and we were satisfied that there were at least 350,000 to 400,000 people in that part of Mullaitivu at that point of time.

I want to make it very clear, Sir, that no one is saying that all the Armed Forces who fought the LTTE on the instructions of the Sri Lankan State should be blamed or punished. The Armed Forces acted on the instructions of the Sri Lankan Government, but those responsible for domestic and international crimes including those responsible on the basis of command responsibility and the chain of command should not be allowed to get away scot free. I say this, because that would be extremely harmful to the future interests of this country, the long-term interests of this country. It is absolutely essential, Sir, that the truth must be ascertained.

The issue of a new constitution.

The second matter I referred to was the Constitution. We all adopted a Resolution in this Parliament unanimously to frame a new Constitution, but we seem stuck. I do not know why, but we seem stuck. I want to refer, Sir, to something which President Barack Obama , the first black American President said shortly after he was elected as the President for the first time in the United States. He said, “The American people must be true to our founding documents, the documents on which America came into being. American people must be true to their founding documents, the document on which America came into being.” Do we, in Sri Lanka, have any founding document, any Constitution to which we can go back and say, “This is our founding document; this is the document on which the country is built, our society is built, which we cherish, which we value, which is the ultimate law of the land? Do we have any such founding document? How can we survive as a nation? How can we survive as a country, when we do not have in this country a constitution which has been accepted by the majority of the people in this country based upon a consensus as much as possible a national consensus? And, this Parliament adopted a unanimous Resolution to frame a new Constitution. Much work has been done in regard to that matter, in fact, the constitutional process has been going on from 1988 for almost 30 years. There was a “Mangala-Moonesinghe Select Committee Report during President Premadasa’s time; there was a Madam Chandrika Bandaranaike’s Report during her term as President- August 2000 Constitutional Proposals; there was a proposal made by President Mahinda Rajapaksa, the Tissa Vitharana Report – the APRC Report. With all these being available to us, we are still unable to frame a Constitution. And, do you think, that is a good thing for the country? Is it good for the country to go on like this? Can you go on like this indefinitely? Is it not harmful to the country? In regard to the national question, Sir, your position appears to be that you have brought about a military solution and there is no need for a political solution now.

I want to in this context, refer to a Statement made by Srimati Indira Gandhi, the Prime Minister of India. When the new State of Bangladesh came into being in 1971, the late Prime Minister of India, Shrimathi Indira Gandhi, in a letter to President Nixon on 15^th December, 1971, in regard to the situation in Bangladesh stated as follows. I quote:

“The fact of the matter is that the rulers of West Pakistan got away with the impression that they could do what they liked, because no one, not even the United States, would choose to take a public position that while Pakistan’s integrity was certainly sacrosanct, human rights, liberty were no less so, and that there was a necessary inter-connection between the inviolability of states and the contentment of their people.”

For the last 70 years the Tamil question remained unresolved.

If you cannot keep the people contented, if you cannot give the people their legitimate rights, then, the sustainability of your unity and your territorial integrity become gravely questionable. Are we not in the same state? How long has the Tamil question remained unresolved? For the last 70 years? And the Constitutional process that we started in 1988 – we are today in 2019 – 30 years down the road. – has not yet been completed and you are unable to complete it. We do not know what is happening. You do not have the will to complete the process and you want to keep the Tamil people as second-class citizens and you want to suppress them militarily even if they were to rise again. Through civil disobedience based upon ahimsa and sathyagraha, you think they can be suppressed. More than 50 per cent of the Tamil population who lived in this country have left this country. Is it your belief that if you proceed with your military course of action even the balance 50 per cent would leave? Is that your position? Is that your thinking? We are committed to a solution within the framework of a united, undivided, indivisible Sri Lanka. We are firmly committed in regard to that. We want to evolve a solution within the framework of a united, undivided, indivisible Sri Lanka. But, if you do not accept that, please do not expect us to live in this country as second-class citizens. We will not live in this country as second-class citizens. We have our own sovereignty to which we will be entitled. In that situation, on account of your lapse, on account of your default to ensure that we are able to exercise our sovereignty within a united country you will create a situation harmful to the country.

The North-East, was neglected in the matter of development even prior to the war commencing.

Before I conclude, Sir, I want to say a few words on North-Eastern development. I have just sent the Hon. Minister, our good Friend, Hon. Mangala Samaraweera a copy of the letter I gave the Prime Minister yesterday. The North-East, Sir, was neglected in the matter of development even prior to the war commencing. We were backwards. We were not given equal treatment. We suffered in development. When the war commenced, the North-East was devastated and destroyed both by the Army and by the LTTE. When we were trying to rebuild the North-East, I and my Colleague, the Hon. Sumanthiran met the Hon. Minister of Finance and impressed upon him the need to start a special fund for the rebuilding of the North-East in the field of agriculture, in the field of fisheries, in the field of livestock development, in the field of industry, in various other activities, employment generation and skills development to enable our youth, our women, our widows to be able to recommence life and lead a respectable life.

We wanted the Minister to start a fund and the Minister promptly agreed and said, “I understand the need for it and we will start a North-East development fund with an initial allocation of Rs. 5 billion from the Ministry to which we add more funds. We will ensure that more funds go in.”

Hon. Minister Mangala Samaraweera when we met you, you assured us that you will transfer Rs. 5 billion this year for the commencement of development activities in the North- East. We have eight districts in the North-East. I do not have to give you the names. The Prime Minister started a mechanism under his chairmanship; coordinators have been appointed; they have consulted our people; they have consulted us and come up with proposals. Each district has come up with proposals up to about Rs. 3 billion. We need in all for a start Rs. 24 billion. We are not demanding the whole thing now. But, kindly give us a substantial percentage, at least 60 or 70 per cent of the Rs. 24 billion, to be able to commence the activities that must be given priority, to ensure that we are able to carry on those activities and to have them fully implemented. I have not a slightest doubt that you will be very sympathetic and very understanding in regard to my request. I would urge you to kindly discuss this matter with the Prime Minister.

After all, Jaffna is an important district, a peninsula; there is the Vanni; there is the Eastern Province which is a large area, comprising of Trincomalee, Batticaloa and Ampara where all people have suffered. Tamil people, in particular, have suffered a great deal. There is much development that is urgently required, particularly, in agriculture, fisheries, livestock development, industries and employment. Women, widows, ex-militants and ex-LTTE cadres who have come back to civilian life need to be looked after. All these things cannot be done if there is no money. We are formulating programmes so that we will be able to deal with these issues expeditiously. That is necessary. There is no purpose in talking about national reconciliation and there is not purpose in talking about goodwill and harmony unless you are able to make a contribution to uplift these people and to improve the standard of living of these people. That is what we are asking for.

So, I would kindly urge you respectfully to enhance your fund for the development of the North-East. Thank you, Sir.

(Edited version of the speech made by Rajavarothiam Sampanthan at the final day of the Budget Discussion 05th April 2019)

An Open Letter To The High Commissioner For Human Rights – V

By Brian Senewiratne –APRIL 9, 2019

Dr. Brian Senewiratne

Chaos in the South

I do not need to draw your attention to the chaos in the (Sinhalese) South. I can quote from your report “Promoting reconciliation, accountability and human rights in Sri Lanka” to the Fortieth session, 25 February – 22 March 2019. You say:

“On 26 October 2018, President Sirisena removed Prime Minister Ranil Wickremasinghe from office and replaced him with former President Mahinda Rajapaksa. Mr Wickremasinghe argued that President Sirisena had no constitutional power to dismiss him given that he still enjoyed the confidence of parliament. Sri Lanka was left with in an unprecedented situation, with two individuals claiming to be the legitimate Prime Minister.

On 9 November 2018, President Sirisena dissolved parliament and called parliamentary elections. On 13 November, the Supreme Court suspended the dissolution of the parliament, which reconvened on 14 November 2018 and passed two motions of no confidence against the Government of Mahinda Rajapaksa, amidst disruptions and violence against members of parliament. President Sirisena rejected the motions citing procedural grounds. On 3 December, an interim order from the Court of Appeal, upheld by the Supreme Court on 14 December, restrained the functioning of the Prime Minister and Cabinet. On 13 December, the Supreme Court decided that Presidential Gazette No. 2096/70 that dissolved parliament was ultra vires and unconstitutional. On 15 December, Mahinda Rajapaksa resigned, and on 16 December Ranil Wickremasinghe was once again sworn in as Prime Minister”.

This chaotic situation in the South is of little concern to the Tamil in the North and East who live in a military/police state. What is important is that with the President and Prime Minister fighting with each other, neither will do anything about the critical situation facing the people in the North and East.

There is an outstanding recent article “Sri Lanka’s Transition to Nowhere” published by the International Crisis Group. It spells out what is going on in Sri Lanka, especially in the Sinhalese South. It is on the net.

One way or the other, at the next Presidential election I will be most surprised if Sirisena is re-elected. Into the vacant shoes will step in the Rajapaksas who are waiting in the wings. Sri Lanka could end up with Gotabaya Rajapaksa as President and Mahinda Rajapaksa as Prime Minister. That will be the end of Sri Lanka in general, the Tamils in particular.

Politically active Buddhist monks

Politically active Buddhist monks have been the curse in Sri Lanka for decades. It was one of them who assassinated Prime Minister S.W.R.D. Bandaranaike in the first political assassination in Sri Lanka. Venerable Somarama Thero who shot the Prime Minister was convicted of murder and hanged. Buddharakhitha Thero who was the master mind behind the assassination was also convicted of murder and sentenced to death. However, he was reprieved and sentenced to life imprisonment.

The power of these monks is enormous. Buddharakkitha Thero, a whiskey-drinking monk saw to it that Bandaranaike appointed his mistress Wimala Wijewardena as the Health Minister. I know all this because my mother was a devout Buddhist and worshipped in the temple where Buddharakhitha was the chief priest.

These Buddhist monks have blocked every attempt by every Government to devolve any power to the Tamils claiming that it is a sell-out of a Sinhala-Buddhist country to the Tamils.

They are now getting even more violent. The Bodu Bala Sena (Buddhist Power Force) led by a very violent man in yellow robes who should have been arrested for threatening the Police and even Ministers in the Government, remained at large till he was arrested, charged and jailed.

On 6 March 2018, President Sirisena declared a state of emergency after violent Buddhist monks attacked Muslim temples, homes and businesses in Kandy. This type of anti-Muslim violence by extremist Buddhist monks will continue.

With some 20,000 Buddhist monks in Sri Lanka the possibility of an acceptable solution to the problems facing the Tamil people is not good.

The 2018 Provincial Council elections

On 10 February 2018, elections were held in 340 local authorities (divisional, urban and municipal councils). The results were a serious blow to the current government, in particular the President. The previous President, Mahinda Rajapaksa, launched a new party – the Podujana Peramuna- which virtually swept the board. Here are the results:

Party Local authorities elected

Sri Lanka Podujana Peramuna (Mahinda Rajapaksa) 231

United national Party (Ranil Wickremesinghe) 34

Sri Lanka Freedom Party (Maithripala Sirisena) 7

Illankai Tamil Arasa Kachchu (Tamil party) 41

Former President Mahinda Rajapaksa has just announced that his brother Gotabaya Rajapaksa will head the new party. Presidential elections are not due till January 2020. If they are held now, it is very likely that President Sirisena will be defeated and the Rajapaksas will be back in power. Mahinda Rajapaksa cannot contest the Presidency because he has already held the maximum number of terms. However, his brother, Gotabaya, a US citizen, can contest provided he renounces his American citizenship which he is doing right now.

Enduring the tragedy of ambiguous loss

BY Jehan Perera-April 8, 2019, 12:00 pm

The appointment last week of commissioners to the Office for Reparation, an independent authority created by the Office for Reparations Act passed in parliament on 9 October 2018, has been the second step of the transitional justice mechanisms for reconciliation process agreed upon by the government and international community. It took place shortly after the conclusion of the UN Human Rights Council session in Geneva, and is an indication of the government’s continued commitment to the implementation of the resolution of the UNHRC that it agreed to in October 2015 and co-sponsored at the cost of much opposition criticism. The responsibility of the Office for Reparation is to identify aggrieved victims qualified for reparation and provide appropriate compensation individually or collectively to them. The office will commence its functions with the appointment of Commissioners.

At the recently concluded session of the UNHRC, the government obtained the concurrence of the international community to extend the implementation period of the co-sponsored resolution by a further two years. This has been met with much criticism on both sides of the ethnic divide. On the one hand, there is the criticism that the process is too slow and there is a need to speed up implementation. The first of the reconciliation mechanisms that the government established, the Office for Missing Persons, has yet to commence finding those who went missing. On the other hand, there is criticism that the government continues to be subject to pressures from the international community with regard to post-war reconciliation.

International experience in implementation of post-war reconciliation measures shows that the process is invariably a slow one. At a recent discussion organized by the International Committee of the Red Cross in Colombo the example of Cyprus was referred. In Cyprus, the Committee on Missing Persons in Cyprus (CMP) was established in 1981 by an agreement between the Greek Cypriot and Turkish Cypriot communities with the backing of the United Nations (UN), to determine the fate of persons reported missing in inter-communal fighting in the 1960s, and as a result of the events of 1974. The CMP does not attempt to investigate, or attribute responsibility for the deaths of missing persons or make findings as to the cause of such deaths. Its mandate is a humanitarian one of "bringing closure to thousands of affected families through the return of the remains of their missing relatives."

CYPRUS EXAMPLE

After the end of the conflict, which ran from December 1963 until August 1974, 2003 people were reported missing: 492 Turkish Cypriots and 1,511 Greek Cypriots. Relying on information from the public, the CMP has excavated some 1,254 sites across the island, finding human remains at 1,200 of these. Each site is carefully searched and where found, the remains exhumed and brought to the laboratory for testing. Families of the missing have provided DNA samples to help identify those found. The CMP reached an important milestone in July 2007, when it began returning the first remains of Greek Cypriot and Turkish Cypriot individuals to their families. Since then the remains of 681 Greek Cypriots and 246 Turkish Cypriots have been found and returned to their families, while hundreds more await identification.

The relevant point to note here is that it took 26 years for the first body of a missing person to be identified and returned to their family. The problem of dealing with the past is made difficult when those who were part of the structures responsible for the disappearances continue to remain in positions of power. Sri Lanka has yet to see a far reaching change in either the structures of the parties responsible for the disappearances and other human rights violations. Those who have a close connection with the events of the past, such as those who supervised the white vans that caused enforced disappearances or enjoyed impunity during the war period in order to eliminate the LTTE at all costs would be concerned about the issues of accountability that could arise from the facts that are unearthed.

The problem of missing persons brings to the fore the continuing divide in Sri Lankan society. The majority would prefer to gloss over the problem and move forward without dealing with the past, whereas the minority would be determined to get to the root of the problem and to ensure accountability. This contrary perception has manifested itself in the contrary opinions being expressed about the need for international participation in the special judicial mechanism, which is the third of the mechanisms that the government committed itself to implementing in terms of the UNHRC resolution. The debate on a hybrid court for accountability has been reignited once again by the UN High Commissioner’s most report which specifically recommends the establishment of a hybrid court in Sri Lanka.

INTERIM SUPPORT

The discovery of the mass grave in Mannar has led to considerable public interest which found its way into the UN High Commissioner’s report also. However, the carbon dating that indicates the remains date back five centuries has been difficult for many to accept. The finding of a research laboratory in the United States that the remains are ancient goes contrary to the prevalent opinion in the north that the mass grave is a testament to the brutality of the war that took place over a period of three decades until it ended in 2009. On the other hand, the carbon dating of the skeletal remains to the 15th-17th centuries has also led to the denial that that mass killings took place during the course of the war. This ignores the fact that massacres took place during the war on both sides.

The LTTE killings of 600 policemen in the east and the killing of virtually the entirety of the Mullaitivu army camp and Elephant Pass camp troops who surrendered when those camps were overrun would account for a significant part of the more than 5000 security forces who are missing and whose families have registered themselves with the ICRC and other official authorities. There were also massacres where the victims of mass killings need not necessarily be buried in mass graves. One incident related in Mannar recounts the killing of a busload of civilians in retaliation for the ambush of an army vehicle by the LTTE. The story is that the conductor of the bus, a Sinhalese, told the vengeful soldiers that his passengers were innocent of that crime and to kill him first if they were to be killed. He was the first victim. There was no need for a mass grave in that incident. Relatives of the victims came to the scene later and removed the bodies of their loved ones for private funerals.

The Office on Missing Persons has been has been provided with information relating to the approximately 16,000 civilians and 5000 security forces personnel who went missing during the war. There would be many more who have not registered with any authority, including the families of LTTE cadre who went missing, but who would not dare to report that to any government authority. From a humanitarian perspective this is the most serious problem in the country which requires an urgent solution. At the ICRC discussion in Colombo the concept of ambiguous loss was discussed. This is the loss that has no official verification, no certainty or clarity and therefore no closure. It is an unending ache and a hope that the missing person will one day reappear. Finding the truth about them will require greater support from the governmental system and manifestation of political will.

In the meantime, those who live in the limbo of ambiguous loss need to be provided with the necessary psycho-social, family and community support to strengthen their individual coping mechanisms. This will be helpful to them, who are the biggest victims of the war, to endure their suffering better, whether or not the answer to their prayer is met.

INVOLVEMENT OF THE UNITED NATIONS IN THE RECONCILIATION PROCESS

DR. S. W. Premarathan – Attorney at Law.-08/04/2019

President Maithripala Sirisena, in the course of his speech to the nation on National Day, said that he is concerned about the interference of the members of the international community in the internal affairs of the country. There is no doubt that he had in his mind the resolutions against Sri Lanka adopted by the UNHRC based in Geneva requiring the Government of Sri Lanka (GOSL) to implement certain recommendations which were considered essential for achieving post war reconciliation by the sponsors of the resolutions. He had expressed strong opposition to the recommendation for establishing a hybrid tribunal to investigate allegations of serious violations of human rights and humanitarian law amounting to war crimes during the last stage of the war concluded in 2009.

Resolution 30/1 motivated by democratic ideals

Resolution 30/1 of the UNHRC was co-sponsored by Sri Lanka because the Government that came into power in 2015 genuinely believed that this resolution recommended some steps the Government should take for achieving genuine reconciliation and durable peace in the country.

By co-sponsoring the resolution Sri Lanka adopted a pragmatic approach to the issue of dealing with the international community led by leading democratic countries such as, the USA and the UK supported by India.

These countries were motivated by democratic ideals to play an effective role to ensure that the GOSL will take steps for the restoration of durable peace.

They have acted on the basis of information received by them, that serious violations of human rights had occurred in Sri Lanka during the Eelam war IV.

In 2012, when a resolution was before the UNHRC in Geneva, the Sri Lankan delegation adopted a confrontational approach arguing that the UN has no right to adopt resolutions against Sri Lanka compelling her to take any steps considered necessary by the sponsors of the resolutions, for addressing the grievances of the people living in the North and the East of Sri Lanka, affected by the war.

The role played by India in supporting the sponsors of the resolution against Sri Lanka in 2012 compelling her to implement the recommendations of the LLRC, among other things, is consistent with the democratic ideals by which the sponsors were guided. India, of course, had a special interest in the conflict within Sri Lanka, and was of the view that she had a special obligation to ensure that the grievances of the Tamil community were satisfactorily addressed by GOSL.

Therefore, the Indian government would have appreciated GOSL’s policy adopted in 2015 for cooperating with the United Nations and undertaking to take all steps to address the legitimate grievances of the Tamil community.

India’s support for UNHRC resolutions

India supported the military defeat of the LTTE together with other leading members of the international community after realising that the LTTE was not prepared to deviate from its hard line position of establishing a separate state – the Tamil Eelam – after several years of peace talks facilitated by Norway.

After the end of the war, India assisted GOSL by providing financial and other material assistance to the people of the North and the East affected by the war, for resettlement, rehabilitation and repairing infrastructure.

The Sri Lankan people appreciated India’s assistance to provide the immediate needs of the people in the war affected area.

The Indian Government expected the Sri Lankan Government to bring law reforms including constitutional amendments necessary for the devolution of power.

The GOSL had on many occasions given an assurance to the Indian leaders that Sri Lanka was prepared to implement the 13th Amendment to the Constitution fully and even to grant additional power to the Provincial Councils making devolution of power meaningful.

However, the Indian government has now realized that the infighting among the political leaders of Sri Lanka in a struggle for capturing power at the forthcoming elections, would be an obstacle to reach consensus among the political parties for substantial amendments to the Constitution or taking steps to complete the implementation of the UNHRC resolution.

Policy of UK Government

Lord Naseby, taking part in the debate in the House of Commons on February 5, appealed to the UK Government to withdraw Resolutions 30/1 and 34/1 of 2015 and 2016, pointing out that one of the leading states that co-sponsored the resolutions, the USA, has withdrawn its membership in the UNHRC based in Geneva, and also considering the progress Sri Lanka has made for achieving post-war reconciliation.

However, the other MPs who took part in the debate insisted that GOSL should implement fully the UNHRC resolutions. But, all the speakers appreciated the steps that GOSL has already taken in the direction of complying with the resolutions, such as, to improve the human rights situation in the country, return of land held by the military to the civilians, establishment of the Office on Missing Persons, the Ratification of the Convention on Enforced Disappearances and passing the Office for Reparations Bill.

Fear of a change of government obstructing the progress

It appears the United Nations has taken into consideration the present state of political instability in Sri Lanka and the possibility of a change of government that would reverse the progress already made after co sponsoring Resolution 30/1. During the ongoing session of the UNHRC in Geneva, Michelle Bachelet Jeria, the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, in a report, warned, “ The political crisis at the end of 2018 further obstructed progress owing not only to the temporary paralysis of investigations but also because it generated fears that another Government might not embrace the reconciliation agenda.

There were also concerns among key stakeholders that a return to power of the pre-2015 administration could have negative implications for their security and the human rights situation”.

The new resolution sponsored by Canada, Germany, Montenegro, North Macedonia and the United Kingdom requires the Sri Lankan Government to implement fully the measures identified by the UNHRC Resolution 30/1.

Grievances of the Sri Lankan Tamil community

Some critics of the involvement of the United Nations in the post war reconciliation, particularly, regarding the violation of human rights and accountability issues, ignore the fact that these resolutions seek to address some reasonable grievances of the Sri Lankan Tamil community occupying the North and the East, who were the most affected by the war. It is the view of all right thinking people that the United Nations is playing a commendable role when they intervene to prevent the violation of human rights, including the right to life, of beleaguered sections of the population in countries affected by ethnic conflicts or civil wars. The experience of the Tamil community of Sri Lanka is that they cannot trust the Sinhala leaders to honour the promises made to address their grievances. This is the main reason for them to solicit the support of other countries, the Tamil Diaspora, especially India.

Critical situation faced by the Sri Lankan Government

The GOSL is now facing a critical situation as the opposition political parties have accelerated their propaganda campaign against the Government in view of the forthcoming elections due to be held towards the end of this year.

They want to create a strong public opinion in the Sinhalese electorates in the South against the proposed constitutional reforms and also against holding an investigation into the allegations of war crimes by the armed forces of the Lankan Government.

The rhetoric that the Opposition uses for mobilising the support of the Sinhalese electorate contains the message that they should strongly oppose the enactment of a new Constitution at this stage as the drafters of the Constitution are motivated by an agenda for dividing the country.

They also contain the message that they should strongly oppose the creation of a tribunal for investigating alleged war crimes since such a tribunal with foreign judges, according to them is aimed at punishing ‘war heroes’.

Leader of the Opposition, Mahinda Rajapaksa, issued a media statement on March 17, urging the Government and the Sri Lankan delegation in Geneva to refrain from co-sponsoring the Resolution already drafted and said, “co sponsoring the same would effectively be a betrayal of the people of Sri Lanka.”In view of the strong opposition expressed by the Leader of the Opposition and also by the President, to co-sponsor the resolution, the people of the country were in a state of uncertainty as to what position the Sri Lankan delegation would take when the resolution regarding Sri Lanka is taken up for discussion.

During the course of the interactive dialogue with the High Commissioner for Human Rights, Minister Thilak Marapana, explained the various steps taken by GOSL for implementing the recommendations of Resolution 30/1. He explained the reasons for the delay or the inability to fulfil some commitments.

For example, he said, there is no provision in our Constitution for appointing foreign judges to sit with Sri Lankan Judges in a tribunal that would be constituted to investigate alleged violations of human rights and humanitarian law, by members of the armed forces and the LTTE, during the last stage of the war.

However, finally, the Sri Lankan delegation has acted wisely and co-sponsored the resolution thereby undertaking to fulfil all the commitments contained in the resolution. We should realise that if the Sri Lankan delegation refused to co-sponsor the resolution and cooperate with the other sponsors, it would have led to serious consequences.

The UN is now sufficiently equipped with effective instruments to deal with states refusing to fulfil undertakings given to the UNHRC.

Sunday Observer 7 April 2018.