British Parliamentarians Misled or Gullible?

(Sunday Island: April 27, 2014)

By Radhika Phillips

As a Sri Lankan from the Tamil community I am perplexed by the last minute cancellation of the visit to Sri Lanka by the British Parliamentarians.

I am from the very community that all sorts of groups try to represent, speak on behalf of, terrorise other communities, try to rescue and appeal to be rescued.

I say: Not in My Name!

We do not need to be patronised. We have lived and progressed as Sri Lankans. I do not want to see the gullible in my community being used by the overseas groups to stage protests and force their children to wail for the camera’s in an attempts to secure “support”. Support for whom I ask? Support based on deception is not the heritage of my people.

As a Sri Lankan of Tamil heritage, I am offended that you have misused the hospitality extended by Murali and his charity – the Foundation of Goodness, a charity that works in all parts of Sri Lanka. A charity that has benefactors and youth that volunteer from all parts of the world and particularly young expatriates of all ethnic and religious groups. A charity that works without boundaries.

I am perplexed that a segment of my community living overseas, has for 30years attempted to damage relationships between Tamils – Sinhalese and between Tamils – Muslims, has once again succeeded in using British media and Parliamentarians to “maintain” a rift. These groups lead a life of luxury and push my people here to violence. Worse still, promoting violence as a way of life – after the people here have just come out of 30 years of violence and terrorising communities. The biggest damage being to our own community – and if like Murali we do not speak out – we care complicit in endorsing the deception of those groups overseas.

I am shocked that the British Parliamentarians allowed themselves to be influenced by the Notorious Channel 4 (that has zero credibility in Sri Lanka after all their antics) and the separatist segments that fuel further dissention in Sri Lanka; disappointed that you opted to be influenced by media that pay lip-service to the groups allowed yourselves to be influenced sufficiently to cancel the invitation by Murali to visit our country.

You missed an opportunity to contribute to the Foundation of Goodness’ reconciliation efforts that touch the lives of the thousands and thousands of our citizens irrespective or ethnicity, gender, religion, caste and class: Transforming the giver and the receiver.

You got sucked into the Notorious Channel 4 media stunt funded by those that have made terrorising a way of life, both in their host country and in my country. It is nothing but a source of income (hence the human smuggling and taxing of the Tamil community overseas) for them. If they truly cared they would stop pushing our community towards fraud, deception and violence, using the lower caste Tamils over and over again in acts of violence and to pay homage to war lords equated to the person of Jesus. 

* There was a time when they said they were Not Allowed to visit this country.

* The hue and cry subsided when the public realised it was a gimmick and could visit.

* When people started to visit they desperately re-strategised to stop the visits

* Then they were told Don’t visit because you will get abducted

* That did not last long as people continued to visit and did not get abducted – what a disappointed as some came “hoping they will get abducted and have a few minutes as a celebrity” – shamefully their well-crafted stories broke out in the press overseas while they were jollying in Sri Lanka

* Then when people visited and returned to say it was all a lot of drama and hype they were strategizing   again

* So now they say human rights issues – but still they visit –  go back to say otherwise

* Finally the lame excuse “don’t go because you will be convinced otherwise”

* Yes for those groups in Europe and North America, that live off taxing the Tamils, shifting vote blocks, funding campaigns are tenacious as it pays their wages.

One wonders when the spin will stop:

* The spin will stop when the recipients start being less gullible and can see for themselves and think for themselves instead of functioning like a herd.

* The spin will stop when those parliamentarians being lobbied stop to think whether they will go after campaign funds and vote blocks or stand up for what is right.

Who should actually visit?

* Those that have the courage and open mindedness to see and think independently and believe. Not those that have a campaign manager stage a few minutes of smiles with X, a few tough boy words Y and a few sympathetic words with Z – just to go back to constituents and say – I did it!

Who should not visit?

* Those that want to create disharmony 

And

* Those that are too afraid of the “media” slander I pray will overcome their insecurities and visit at some point to educate themselves

Maybe it is time to “reflect” on what you did to a charitable organization and to the hard earned personal funds of a cricket legend – Muttiah Muralitharan.

I hope you do know that the TNA (synonymous with divisiveness and racism) MP Sritharan passed a FATWA on Murali to say he is not allowed to play cricket in their constituency because he exercised his right to “free speech” and told the British PM that he is misled and misinformed about Sri Lanka. Misled by whom? Well one wonders if it is the same people that misled the Parliamentarians.

I hope the British Parliamentarians will have more courtesy than their Prime Minister when he visited Sri Lanka – and apologise and restore the cost from their campaign funds – as Murali bore the cost of the business class air tickets and the hotel bookings for the Parliamentarians and their Spouses!

What will be shameful is if the Parliamentarians try to save face by justifying their last minute cancellation by scapegoating our Nation!

 

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized

A Tamil Voice of Dissent Against Western Hypocrisy

Colombo, 24 April, (Asiantribune.com)

V. Anandasangaree, the veteran Tamil leader has raised his voice of dissent against Western hypocrisy. He blamed Stephen Harper for his questionable judgment regarding the suspension of contribution to Commonwealth Fund.

In a public letter address to Stephen Harper, Prime Minister of Canada, Anandasangaree pointed out that he was “only trying to respectfully point out to you that this decision will certainly directly or indirectly have adverse effect on the very same people with whom you sympathize with and those who had undergone untold hardships during the war that lasted more than quarter of a century.”

Anandasangaree also pointed out, “I was very much upset over your failure to attend the CHOGM conference held in Colombo last November

He not only blamed Canadian Prime Minister but also Indian Prime Minister for their failure to attend the last Commonwealth Conference.

“If the Prime Minister of India and your Excellency had made your presence at the conference both of you could have joined the British Prime Minister and jointly taken the initiative, to discuss the ethnic problem of Sri-Lanka. It was at a similar conference that the initiative was taken to discuss the South African apartheid problem that ultimately found the solution with the interference of the Commonwealth.

He added further blame on , “ I am one who is still worrying for missing the golden opportunity that came on our way to discuss our ethnic problem. The Tamil leadership in Sri-Lanka and the Tamil Diaspora in the United Kingdom should bear the blame for it.

Given below the full text of the open letter to Canadian Prime Ministere Stephen Harper:

His Excellency Stephen Harper,
Prime Minister of Canada,
Prime Minister’s office,
Ottawa,
Canada.

Your Excellency,

Suspension of Contribution to the Commonwealth Fund

As a Senior Tamil citizen of Sri-Lanka which is a member of the Commonwealth, may I take the liberty to strongly urge you to re-consider your Government’s decision to suspend your country’s contribution to the Commonwealth fund .I am neither challenging nor finding fault with your decision, which is your right but only trying to respectfully point out to you that this decision will certainly directly or indirectly have adverse effect on the very same people with whom you sympathize with and those who had undergone untold hardships during the war that lasted more than quarter of a century. Of the eight districts in the North and the East, in the districts of Kilinochchi and Mullaitheevu people lost almost all their possessions and in the rest of the other six district too people lost very heavily.

I am in Politics for well over sixty years, an octogenarian and a Member of Parliament for 17 years. I also won the UNESCO’s Madanjeet Singh award for the Promotion of tolerance and non-Violence for the year 2006. I am aware of the close relationship your country had with Sri-Lanka and of the tremendous contributions your country made for the development of our country. The International Airport at Katunayake named after one of Sri Lanka’s Prime Ministers the Late Hon.S.W.R.D. Bandarnayake is a living monument of the close relationship the two countries have. The Diesel locomotives, nine in number each carrying the name of one of the provinces of Canada, gifted by your Government are still pulling our trains to various destinations although they are over half a century old, There are many other gifts of your Government we Sri-Lankans remember with gratitude.

I am one who had always considered Canada not merely as a friendly country, but also as one that is very much interested in developing it. I have mentioned all these in a letter dated 06.11.2013 sent to the President of Sri Lanka His excellency Mahinda Rajapakse during the LCHOGM conference ( a copy annexed). I was very much upset over your failure to attend the CHOGM conference held in Colombo last November. Furthermore we have a lot of our friends and relations who had obtained Canadian Citizenship. I too had made a number of Visits to Canada.

Your Excellency, I am one who is still worrying for missing the golden opportunity that came on our way to discuss our ethnic problem. The Tamil leadership in Sri-Lanka and the Tamil Diaspora in the United Kingdom should bear the blame for it. They little realized that the CHOGM, was the best forum in which the long standing Sri-Lanka ethnic issue could have been fully discussed and could have been a good opening to start negotiations. His Excellency Hon. David Camron, the Prime Minister of United Kingdom and the Head of the state that gave freedom to all the 54 countries and made them Members of the Commonwealth, participated at the conference. If the Prime Minister of India and your Excellency had made your presence at the conference both of you could have joined the British Prime Minister and jointly taken the initiative, to discuss the ethnic problem of Sri-Lanka. It was at a similar conference that the initiative was taken to discuss the South African apartheid problem that ultimately found the solution with the interference of the Commonwealth.

Your Excellency, Those who ought to have taken over the responsibility of taking the ethnic issue at the conference did not breathe one word about it although nothing prevented them from taking up the ethnic problem along with the problem of Human Rights Violation. The Diaspora in the United Kingdom had only one agenda- the Human Rights Violation and they stuck only to that. The local Tamil Leaders of the TNA (Tamil National Alliance) acted on the instructions of the Diaspora from England and did not bother about the ethnic problem in spite of the fact that the CHOGM conference was the best forum that came on their way without any effort on their part. The TNA for their part only called for a five day hartal to cover the entire period from 15.11.2013 till 20.11.2013 during which delegates were available in Sri-Lanka.

Your Excellency I hope you will understand my concerns. You may recall that initiatives for the abolition of Apartheid was taken at a conference like this and successfully ended at a Sub-committee meeting in the United Kingdom .I rest assured, that your Excellency will take the initiative with the co-operation of the Prime Ministers of India and UK to help us to solve the ethnic problems. As a prelude and to earn the Co-operation of the parties concerned, please reconsidered your decision as regards the suspension of the contribution to the commonwealth fund and proceed to help to solve our problems in Sri-Lanka.

Thanking you

With Kind Regards,

V. AnandaSangaree

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized

Cameron’s Rights’ HOCUS-POCUS

Dr Kamal Wickremasinghe ( Courtesy: Daily News)

As a politician, the British Prime Minister David Cameron has earned many colourful descriptions of his character and personality – the veteran Scottish MP Sir Thomas (Tam) Dalyell described Cameron as “an actor who has never had a proper job”; Charlie Brooker, satirist and columnist for the Guardian newspaper, quipped – “There is nothing to him. He is like a hollow Easter egg with no bag of sweets inside.”

It must be said in Cameron’s defence that he has consciously earned such reputations. Since coming to power in 2011, with the help of his Foreign Secretary William Hague, he has managed to construct the elaborate hoax of a foreign policy the two have repeatedly claimed “has human rights at its heart”; They have urged ministers and diplomats to press human rights concerns “whenever and wherever they arise”.

Looking remarkably like the 70s TV character Kojak, Hague, with a conviction of electoral malpractice of “blatant ballot box stuffing” as President of the Oxford University Conservative Association (OUCA), has been the perfect ‘partner in crime’ for Cameron. Hague’s character can also be gauged by a 2001 poll in the Daily Telegraph in which 70 per cent of voters believed he would “say almost anything to win votes”, and 66 per cent considered him to be “a bit of a wally”.

Hague’s announcement this week that the United Nations Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) inquiry on Sri Lanka will soon begin “the process” of establishing an investigation to assess “a broad range of information and evidence” needs to be taken against the background of this Cameron-Hague conspiracy of a bogus human rights protection mission.

China calls Cameron’s bluff

Despite their continuing efforts however, it seems now, as suggested by China’s cancellation this week of the “bilateral human rights dialogue with Britain”, that the major countries of the world are beginning to see through Cameron’s bogus human rights ‘campaigner’ façade and the world is losing patience with his hypocrisy.

The cancellation of the “human rights dialogue” with China is a big blow to Cameron who highlighted it as an important achievement of his trip to Beijing last November. Less than a year later, China is now accusing the UK of “using human rights issues to interfere in its internal affairs” through plots such as the goading of NGOs at the UNHRC to demand that a minute’s silence be observed in memory of a dead Chinese “activist”.

It was only a matter of time before the world called Cameron’s bluff on his egregiously sanctimonious “human rights” façade. He has been raising “concerns” about trumped-up issues such as human rights in Sri Lanka and the right of self-determination in the Falklands. But in glaring recent examples of duplicity, Cameron has had the temerity to berate the Russian President Vladimir Putin over Ukraine, after orchestrating the terrorist movement that violently overthrew the elected government of that country; In a speech to the Israeli Knesset, in mid-March, he refrained from using the words “occupation” to refer to the 47 year occupation of the West Bank and Syria’s Golan Heights in defiance of numerous UN Security Council resolutions.

The lack of credibility of Cameron’s interest in the alleged war crimes in Sri Lanka are also founded on his obvious motive to hide his own human rights abuses, and in his desperate attempt to maintain “colonial” influence in Sri Lanka’s domestic affairs.

Cameron now threatens to pull out of the EU Human Rights Court

Cameron’s hypocrisy on human rights on the domestic front has been equally spectacular. In a recent article for The Telegraph, launching Tory campaign for the European Parliament elections in May, he made “reforming” Britain’s relations with the European Court of Human Rights top priority, as the price for remaining in the EU and to stop Britain being “sucked into a United States of Europe”

The centrepiece of Cameron’s package of measures is the legislative changes designed to scale back the power of human rights judges of the European Court of Human Rights in imposing human rights in Britain. Cameron aims to achieve this by repealing a Section in the British Human Rights Act that requires the government to “have regard” to the European Court of Human Rights. A new Act of Parliament will also be enacted with the objective of preventing the Strasbourg court creating human rights precedents by making British courts the final arbiter of the law.

The EU changes demanded by Cameron arise primarily from his clash with the European Court over the order banning the deportation of Islamic cleric Abu Qatada to his native Jordan, due to violation of his human right to a family life in the UK, and fears of his not receiving a fair trial in Jordan.

In a glaring display of inconsistency that exposes Cameron’s bogus commitment to “human rights everywhere”, he now threatens to withdraw the UK from the European Convention on Human Rights and the European Court if he is unable to get his way.

Double-standard on human rights

The Cameron-Hague style of repulsive double-standard on human rights seems to be founded on the arrogant premise that the powerful states are free to violate human rights of their own citizens as well as those marginalised by them internationally, like the Chagossians – the citizens of the island of Diego Garcia forcibly evicted by the British between 1965 and 1973. Cameron’s version of human rights protection seems to be founded on the premise that, he attempts to lecture the world on human rights, and starting “revolutions” in other countries on the basis of human rights, while taking no heed of any critique of his own human rights record.

UN Committee Against Torture (CAT) picks holes in Cameron’s human rights facade

During the recently concluded 25th sessions of the UNHRC held in Geneva, while Cameron was busily campaigning to garner support for his anti-Sri Lankan resolution, the UN Committee Against Torture (CAT) accused the UK delegation of being evasive on questions about Britain’s own human rights record.

The CAT pointed to a litany of human rights abuses by the British government during the so-called war on terror, including the mistreatment of prisoners in British custody in Iraq. The committee was “deeply concerned at the growing number of serious allegations of torture and ill-treatment, as a result of Britain’s military interventions in Afghanistan and Iraq.” It also flagged up some 40 separate incidents on which the UK government must act.

The CAT urged the British government to quickly establish an inquiry into whether detainees held overseas were ill-treated or tortured by British officials, warning that urgent action is needed for Britain to meet international standards. All this, while Cameron was working on “applying pressure” on Sri Lanka to initiate an inquiry to look into matters that are alleged to have happened nearly a decade later!

In a reminder of his own responsibilities, the CAT requested the Cameron government that historical investigations into past misconduct of military officials must not be delayed or suspended.

The panel also expressed disappointment that Britain has failed, to date, to prosecute anyone for the torture of Iraqi prisoners and to convict anyone for the murder of the Iraqi prisoner Baha Mousa who died in British custody in 2003 in Basra, with just one soldier given a one-year sentence for admitting inhumane treatment.

The UN team also slammed a number of legal loopholes in the relevant British legislation including “an escape clause” in the Criminal Justice Act (1988), which allows officials accused of torture to escape prosecution if they can demonstrate “lawful authority, justification or excuse” for committing the act. Also, the CAT found the provision in the Intelligence Services Act (1994), which effectively ensures that intelligence officers cannot be prosecuted within the UK upon the grant of “lawful authority” by a government minister inconsistent with international standards.

Deportation of asylum seekers

There was also concern expressed regarding the British government’s plan to introduce Closed Material Procedures that will allow the admittance of hearsay as evidence and evidence obtained through torture. The CAT also criticised the failure of the Cameron government to secure the release of Shaker Aamer, the UK resident in Guantanamo, despite the purported “best endeavours”.

In a glaring pointer to Cameron’s duplicity, the CAT questioned the UK government’s deportation of failed asylum seekers to Sri Lanka, a country he himself is (falsely of course) accusing of committing human rights abuses.

While Cameron and Hague are hyper-ventilating about the need for Sri Lanka to cooperate with the OHCHR inquiry, the CAT gave the British government a year to explain how it could improve its human rights record in the areas of overseas torture, getting Shaker Aamer out of Guantanamo and setting up inquiries into past military abuses in Northern Ireland.

Human rights is the cover of neo-colonialism

There is clearly a pattern common to the foreign policy of the US, and its “special relation” the UK that centres around a bogus commitment to human rights protection, globally.

The Russian and Chinese governments are becoming increasingly wary of the new push based on frequent criticisms of their record on human rights by the US and UK.

Russia recently accused Britain of failing to practice what it preaches on human rights after the British government forced the Guardian newspaper to destroy the computer hard drives containing the information given to it by US whistle-blower Edward Snowden. “The measures taken by the British authorities towards the Guardian newspaper are out of tune with British statements on commitments to universal standards of human rights”, a Russian statement said.

The Chinese foreign ministry asked the US on Monday to stop “gesticulating” regarding China’s treatment of dissidents, after Washington expressed “deep disappointment” at a Beijing court’s decision to uphold a four-year jail sentence granted to a prominent “activist”.

Foreign policy

China pointed out that the prisoner was a Chinese citizen who broke the law, being punished and asked that the US stop using so-called human rights as an excuse to interfere in China’s internal affairs.

The role of human rights as a tool of foreign policy has been sharpened by Western governments since the end of the Cold War, through the conspiracies relating to the Balkan, Iraqi and Libyan Wars. Britain is currently fully synchronising its foreign policy, in a bipartisan way, to align with this lie.

In a recent speech, the shadow international development secretary Jim Murphy signified this trend by pledging that human rights would be at the heart of Labour’s aid agenda, with tough new conditions put on UK development assistance through a “human rights unit” set up at the Department for International Development.

Survival in today’s world is dependent on being awake to such conspiracies and Sri Lanka is one of the countries with the intellectual heritage to resist such evil designs – rejecting the OHCHR resolution is justifiable on this grounds alone.

 

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized

Accuser as Judge and Jury

The Island Editorial April 4, 2014

US Ambassador in Colombo Michele J. Sison is doing everything in her power to justify her country’s resolution against Sri Lanka at the UNHRC. She cannot be faulted for doing her job. But, some of the arguments she has put forth in support of the US action are not convincing, to say the least.

Ambassador Sison has told foreign correspondents in Colombo that the US should not be blamed for long-standing divisions in Sri Lanka. Here, one sees the so-called straw man fallacy. No one in his or her proper senses will make such an allegation. Sri Lanka’s divisions, especially those along ethno-religious line, are as old as the hills and some of them even predate the discovery of America!

But, the recently adopted US-sponsored UNHRC resolution has caused reconciliation to elude this country further. For, it has made LTTE groups active overseas intransigent and cocky so much so that they are now all out to use the UNHRC to avenge the decimation of their military muscle and pursue their separatist goal politically with the help of some western governments.

The US envoy has urged the Sri Lankan government to fulfil its obligations to its people and take meaningful, concrete steps on reconciliation and accountability. The latter, no doubt, must do so, but it takes two to tango, doesn’t it?

What about the proponents of the UNHRC resolution, who recognised Prabhakaran as the sole representative of Tamils? Reconciliation is anathema to them because they need ethnic tensions to fuel their Eelam project and secure block votes. It is not reconciliation that they seek but revenge and an opportunity to create conditions for re-launching their Eelam project. They are doing their damnedest to have the incumbent government responsible for defeating the LTTE dislodged because they see it as an insurmountable obstacle in their path. They are striving to pave the way for a malleable government like the one which allowed itself to be railroaded into signing a blatantly lopsided CFA with the LTTE and compromising national security at the behest of external forces. Their not-so-surreptitious plan and the agenda of the West desirous of engineering a regime change here to further their geo-strategic interests dovetail.

The US policy towards the LTTE has been consistent and it has repeatedly declared its commitment to helping preserve Sri Lanka’s territorial integrity. But, sadly, there is little that it could do to avoid being seen to be promoting the interests of pro-LTTE groups because of its diplomatic badger hunt against Sri Lanka in Geneva.

Ambassador Sison is reported to have told journalists that for the first time, ‘the resolution requests a comprehensive investigation, to be undertaken by the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR), into alleged serious violations and abuses of human rights and related crimes committed in Sri Lanka by both sides, during the 2002-2009 period covered by the Lessons Learnt and Reconciliation Commission (LLRC) Report’.

Yes, it does make such a call. The US may preen itself on its diplomatic victory against a tiny country though it could not secure India’s support for its move. But, there is absolutely no need for such an investigation! The OHCHR has already found those who defeated the LTTE guilty of war crimes as could be seen from what UNHRC Chief Navi Pillay has said in her report on Sri Lanka. The same goes for the UNSG’s office, if the Darusman Report commissioned by it is any indication. Here is a situation where the accuser has been allowed to act as the judge and the jury as well. All signs are that the OHCHR’s probe will turn out to be a kangaroo trial.

The US wishes to encourage the Sri Lankan government to cooperate fully with UN mechanisms, Ambassador Sison says. But, the problem with them is that they are manipulated by vested interests to further their interests on the pretext of protecting human rights.

 

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized

Island Editorial

 

Friends!

March 31, 2014, 8:54 pm

US Ambassador in Colombo Michele J. Sison has claimed that the recently adopted US-backed Geneva resolution is not against Sri Lanka. It was undertaken in recognition of the resilience shown by Sri Lankans following years of conflict and their yearning for democracy and prosperity, she has said. The US maintains that it has done so as a friend of Sri Lanka!

If that resolution is not against Sri Lanka as the US envoy claims how come LTTE sympathisers including some Tamil Nadu politicians exulted at its passage? India flatly refused to vote for the resolution, dismissing it as ‘an intrusive approach that undermines national sovereignty and institutions [and therefore] is counterproductive; any significant departure from the core principle of constructive international dialogue and cooperation has the potential to undermine efforts of Human Rights Council (UNHRC) for promoting universal respect for the protection of human rights and fundamental freedoms’. Twelve UNHRC members voted against the US-backed resolution on similar grounds. Does the US think these countries are not Sri Lanka’s friends and they have not recognized ‘the resilience shown by Sri Lankans following years of conflict and their yearning for democracy and prosperity’?

Ambassador Sison has frowned on the deterioration of Sri Lanka’s human rights situation. Yes, the general consensus is that the government has not done enough to improve its human rights record and its cavalier attitude has proved to be counterproductive.

But, shouldn’t the US which pontificates to other countries about the need to protect human rights and address accountability issues practise what it preaches?

The UN Human Rights Committee has recently urged the US to ‘ensure that all cases of unlawful killings, torture or other ill-treatment, unlawful detention, or enforced disappearance are effectively, independently and impartially investigated and that perpetrators, including, in particular, persons in command positions, are prosecuted’. In other words, this call has had to be made because the US has not yet probed these crimes. Isn’t the UNHRC duty bound to step in to conduct a ‘comprehensive and independent investigation’ into such accountability issues?

The UN Human Rights Committee has flayed President Barack Obama for his failure to fulfil a commitment to close the Guantánamo Bay Prison. One of his pre-election promises was to close down that Black Hole. Many detainees have been held there and in military prisons in Afghanistan for more than a decade without charge or trial, the committee has pointed out. Will the US welcome a UNHRC resolution calling for an international mechanism to probe these serious human rights violations?

Among the other offences the Human Rights Committee has hauled the US over the coals for are enduring racial disparities in the justice system including large numbers of black prisoners serving longer sentences than whites, mistreatment of mentally-ill and juvenile prisoners, segregation in schools, high levels of homelessness and criminalization of homeless people, racial profiling by police, including the mass surveillance of Muslim communities by the New York police department, failure to prosecute senior members of its armed forces and private contractors involved in torture and targeted killings. Strangely, the UNHRC has chosen to turn a blind eye to these very serious charges.

If the recently adopted Geneva resolution is really aimed at helping Sri Lanka improve its human rights situation and bring about reconciliation as Ambassador Sison has argued, then there is no reason why the proponents thereof should not help the US similarly by getting the UNHRC to probe its human rights violations, at least, the ones listed by the UN independent experts. That’s what friends are there for––according to the US!

 

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized

An Urgent Appeal to the United Nations Human Rights Council

WORLD ALLIANCE FOR PEACE IN SRI LANKA

20th March 2014

To: Members of the UNHRC 2014

An Urgent Appeal to the United Nations Human Rights Council toReject the Draft Resolution against Sri Lanka

We, concerned individuals and organizations around the world, urge the United Nations Human Rights Council (UNHRC) to reject the proposed draft Resolution (HRC-25) directed against Sri Lanka. The draft resolution is in contravention of the basic principles of the UNHRC as enunciated in its ‘Charter,’ including the principles of “universality, impartiality, objectivity, non-selectivity and constructive international dialogue,” along with the norms of fair play and justice.

The draft Resolution raises concerns with respect to two sets of issues: first, a purported increase in human rights violations in the country; and second, a lack of progress with regard to accountability, i.e. a lack of credible investigations into violations of humanitarian laws allegedly committed during the last stages of the war.

With regard to the issue of human rights violations, the UNHRC has an established mechanism to take up such matters – namely the Universal Periodic Review (UPR) and therefore there is no justification for a country- specific resolution.

With respect to the issue of accountability, the High Commissioner’s report of 24 February 2014 (A/HRC/25/23) that is intended to be the basis of any Resolution adopted in the present sessions, cites two sources of allegations regarding the issue of alleged violations of humanitarian law: The Secretary General’s Panel of Experts (POE) Report of March 2011, and the Channel 4 videos.

The POE and Channel 4 videos have not at any stage been tabled officially before the Council and Sri Lanka has had no opportunity to respond to them before the Council. Thus, the credibility of these two sources has never been tested. This is a serious violation of procedural fairness.

Furthermore, with respect to the POE, there are allegations that sample letters generated by Tamil Diaspora elements and sent online to the Panel comprise a part of the evidence on which the Panel reached its conclusions with regard to alleged violations of humanitarian law; that satellite photos used by the Panel were manipulated; and that data on humanitarian aid sent to the conflict zone by the Government of Sri Lanka was deliberately under-reported.

With respect to the Channel 4 videos, the latest allegations against them involve claims that witnesses used in the videos are “fully paid-up members of the Tamil Tigers.” These allegations are of so serious a nature that they deserve to be investigated.

The draft Resolution (HRC-25) in its recommendations requests the High Commissioner, inter alia “to lead a comprehensive investigation into alleged serious violations and abuses of Human Rights and related crimes by both parties in Sri Lanka.” It should be noted that the UNHRC can avail itself of the UPR mechanism to address these concerns, because the UPR mechanism is specifically designed to ensure compliance with the principles of the UNHRC’s ‘Charter.’

The UN General Assembly Resolution 60/251 that set up the Human Rights Council does not mandate the Office of the High Commissioner to engage in any investigation, leave alone “lead” an investigation into Human Rights violations. Assigning such a mandate would be in violation of the UN Charter and would furthermore set a dangerous precedent. The Resolution should be rejected for these reasons.

We represent organizations and individuals in many countries. Standing in solidarity with the great majority of people in Sri Lanka and others who are of view that the UNHRC in pursuing country-specific resolutions against Sri Lanka is exceeding its mandate and thereby facilitating an erosion of international law, we urge the United Nations to advise the Human Rights Council to reject the draft Resolution (HRC-25).

( This appeal has been signed by hundreds of concerned individuals from all parts of the world)

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized

MIRACLES CAN’T BE PERFORMED OVERNIGHT

(Courtesy of Sunday Observer)

The United States and the co-sponsors of the latest Resolution against Sri Lanka to the United Nations Human Rights Commission (UNHRC) have not only brazenly interfered with the internal matters of a sovereign state but have also violated Sri Lanka’s constitution.

Sri Lanka’s Permanent Representative to the UN in Geneva Ambassador Ravinatha Aryasinha had quite rightly pointed out that the draft resolution on Sri Lanka deposited with the UNHRC by the core group comprising the US, UK, Mauritius, Montenegro and Macedonia, violates the constitutional provision of Sri Lanka.

The draft resolution is highly intrusive and is in breach of the sovereignty of the citizens of Sri Lanka and the country’s territorial integrity. It is politicised and a clear contravention of the accepted principles of conduct in the UNHRC. The resolution sets a bad precedent, and can in the medium-to-long term have an adverse impact on all developing member countries in the Council.

The vested interests of some Western countries are understandable as they prefer to have a Sri Lankan leadership that would dance to their whims and fancies. President Mahinda Rajapaksa and the ruling UPFA Government have always maintained an independent foreign policy without singing hosannas to the West.

It goes without saying that certain British politicians thrive on the Tamil Diaspora vote and are obliged to the LTTE sympathisers. But it is intriguing that Mauritius, Montenegro and Macedonia have become co-sponsors of the Resolution against Sri Lanka. It would be small wonder whether the representatives of these countries know at least Sri Lanka’s geographical location on the world map, apart from the contents of the Resolution and the true ground situation here altogether.

As Aryasinha had stressed, anyone unaware of the real ground situation in Sri Lanka at the Human Rights Council sessions over the past week, could not be blamed for thinking that Sri Lanka is perhaps the most troubled spot on this planet.

The draft text before the UNHRC sessions by the core group presenting this resolution – the USA, UK, Mauritius, Montenegro and Macedonia, should be reminded that Sri Lanka, like many Asian, African and Latin American countries represented in the world human rights body, had emerged from the yoke of colonialism as far back as 1948.

It is deplorable that they had conveniently forgotten the fact that Sri Lanka had suffered untold misery for almost three decades due to ruthless terrorism unleashed by the LTTE, world’s most ruthless terrorist organisation. After battling terrorism for three years in the humanitarian operation – the world’s largest human rescue mission, over half a million civilians were rescued from the jaws of death.

The most noteworthy achievement after the successful completion of the humanitarian operation on May 18, 2009 was that not a single person died in Sri Lanka due to terrorism. Moreover, all displaced civilians have been resettled after demining the LTTE-held areas. They received a new lease of life as the Government had invested four billion rupees on infrastructure development in the North.

Sri Lanka has embarked on an ambitious reconciliation drive by implementing the National Plan of Action of the Lessons Learnt and Reconciliation Commission (LLRC). It is a crying shame that certain Western countries which pontificate to us on reconciliation had failed to behold the peaceful coexistence of all communities after terrorism was eradicated.

Notwithstanding these remarkable achievements, the obsession shown by some leaders, in the call for action on Sri Lanka, only bears out their hidden agenda in relentlessly targeting Sri Lanka, to placate pro-LTTE Tamil constituencies, for collateral electoral political gain. The baseless Resolution and any further action would only impede reconciliation now under way.

There is no rationale whatsoever to justify the call for a third successive US-led resolution on Sri Lanka during the UNHRC’s current session. The Government will continue to engage with all parties to seek a constructive dialogue on how to move reconciliation in Sri Lanka forward.

It is earnestly hoped that this spirit of engagement will be reciprocated, and that member and observer states of the UNHRC will perceive development in Sri Lanka with an open mind. Nevertheless, disgruntled international elements would by no means be tolerated in the guise of reconciliation.

The US intention to present the third successive Resolution against Sri Lanka at the UNHRC sessions was made known to the Government only in January, long before the UNHRC chief’s report was available. This is a clear indication that it was led by political imperatives, rather than an objective assessment of the situation on the ground situation as the UNHRC mandate, would need to base its assessment on Navi Pillay’s Report.

Sri Lanka has categorically rejected the recommendations in Pillay’s latest report, which reflected bias, and was tantamount to an unwarranted interference in the internal affairs of a sovereign state. The Report itself contained substantial erroneous information and misperceptions and Sri Lanka called upon the OHCHR to correct through its Comments of the State on the Report which has been made public, though not reflected as an Addendum to the Report.

Sri Lanka was amazed by the violation of the UNHRC procedure envisaged by this draft which is in clear contravention of the rules of procedure and the method of engagement that guide the Council. The draft resolution is an unjustified endeavour to vest the Office of the High Commissioner with an investigative mandate, monitoring and assessment. These run contrary to the UNHRC Resolution 60/251, the IB package and Resolution GA 48/141.

Hence, Sri Lanka has rejected in toto such disingenuous efforts on the part of the proponents of the resolution to by-pass the method of engagement of the Council, which could not only set bad precedents, but also have wider relevance to all member and observer states of the Council.

It is crystal clear that the new draft resolution, which violates the constitution of Sri Lanka, is highly intrusive and is in breach of the sovereignty of the Sri Lankan people and the country’s territorial integrity. It also goes against, the core values of the UDHR, core international human rights treaties and basic principles of law that postulate equality among all people, the GA resolution 60/251 and the IB package.

Hence, the proponents of the resolution should take cognizance of the reconciliation in Sri Lanka. This is imperative at a time when Sri Lanka is implementing comprehensive reconciliation with all communities, having overcome the scourge of terrorism after a 30-year struggle.

This type of intimidation would not only be confined to Sri Lanka and would also pose a challenge to other sovereign states which are smaller in extent and with limited firepower. In this scenario, all Non-Aligned Movement (NAM) member states must continue to show their solidarity with Sri Lanka.

Sri Lanka’s opposition to the Resolution was a fight on a matter of principle and Sri Lanka would not compromise on it. The member states of NAM should realise that what happens to Sri Lanka today, could happen to any other NAM country tomorrow.

Sri Lanka, over the years, continued to engage with the international community and needed no Resolutions encouraging it to do so. During that time too, Sri Lanka briefed various groups and shared information in a transparent manner.

Quite apart from the successful demining of the areas held by the terrorists and the speedy resettlement of persons displaced due to LTTE terror, Sri Lanka has rehabilitated around 12,000 ex-combatants and former child soldiers have been reunited with their families while others have been provided with a tertiary education within five years.

No other country, for that matter, had achieved such unique goals after the bitter battlefield experience. One is at a loss to understand as to what the West expects of us in the guise of reconciliation. Can they coerce Sri Lanka to perform miracles overnight?

 

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized

Another point of view ! Media and the suffering of the Tamil people-


True report from a Tamil Journalist for the UN & Tamil Diaspora
.

 By Noel Nadesan – Courtesy Daily Mirror

 

 As a Tamil domiciled in Australia I served the Tamil community by editing the only Tamil community newspaper, UTHAYAM. I ran it for 14 years My experiences in dealing with the Tamil community, both in Australia and in Sri Lanka, make me feel sad about the callous way in which the media is exploiting the suffering of our Tamil people for self-serving ends. I think I could speak as an independent voice with no allegiances to the politics of either community or political parties. My main concern has been to help our Tamils in Sri Lanka who had to face the brunt of all attacks from the Indians soldiers, Sri Lankan forces and, above all, the so-called Tamil liberators, the LTTE. I have just completed building a small hospital in the island of Eluvaitivu, in which I grew up and, sooner or later, I plan to go back to serve our Tamil people who are desperately in need of help.

              It is against this background that I thought of forwarding my comments to you after viewing the re-broadcast of Channel 4 programme, The Killing Fields of Sri Lanka. I must confess I felt depressed and I could not sleep that night. I have recovered since then and I feel I must send you my comments for your consideration because I feel that you aired it to exploit the suffering of our people whose need of the hour is not to rake up the bloody past but to find a way out of the past.

       I fail to see how your programme could help the victims of the war – if that was your intention – when their immediate and long-term needs are to regain a future free from these. The sensationalism certainly may help the ratings of Channel 4 and BBC but how will it help our people? Our people who lived through the horrors of the futile war know that this is only one side of the story. Our Tamil leaders have informed the world that the LTTE has killed more Tamils than all the other forces – Indian, Sri Lankan and rival Tamil parties – put together. The moralizings of the media lacks credibility because our people who lived through the horrors of the war know who killed whom in what manner. Leaving aside the die-hard partisans, our people know that the LTTE was a cruel and beastly outfit they had never encountered in living memory – and do not want to encounter in all their lives to come.                         

           Undoubtedly, there are Tamils who are jubilant about this broadcast because they are aligned politically to the side (i.e., the LTTE) that perpetrated the worst crimes against the Tamils. If Channel 4 produced a film of the atrocities committed by the LTTE against their own people and the other communities throughout the 33-year-old war – the longest running in Asia – it would shock the world beyond belief. Then there is the documented story of Velupillai Prabhakaran herding nearly 300,000 Tamil civilians to serve as his human shield when he was retreating. In the last stages he shot the Tamils who were running away from him into the arms of the Sri Lankan forces who were commended or their humanitarian services by the Ban Ki-moon’s expert panel and even by Gordon Weiss. Any Tamil who was in Prabhakaran’s human shield will tell you that the Sri Lankan force treated them humanely than the LTTE cadres. 

                  The atrocities committed by the LTTE are numerous. Why didn’t Channel 4 balance their story with the other side? Yes, there were passing references to LTTE atrocities but you will agree that the blame was put entirely on the Sri Lankan government. Is this fair journalism?  It was a controversial document in which the best of experts disagreed on the authenticity and the accuracy of the contents. For instance, Channel 4 showed images of a young man who was tied to a tree, threatened with a knife and subsequently killed. I was told by sources in the Wanni that this was an LTTE operation and pictures were taken for propaganda purposes by LTTE.

               Have a close look and you will find among the so-called soldiers a man in slippers. Sri Lankan soldiers never go about in slippers when they go out on operations.  Those who know both sides of the story were appalled by your decision to air a partisan video. Despite occasional references to the LTTE the main thrust of the video was to blame the Sri Lankan government. You were aware of this gross distortion and you went ahead because it fitted into your biased political agenda. As stated by the London Sunday Times, it was shoddy journalism unworthy of a reputed media institution like the BBC. Take the case of Suthanthirapuram which was declared as the first No-Fire Zone for the civilians. The LTTE moved their radio station and artillery unit to fire at Army points from NFZ. They were also firing at the advancing army from close proximity to the hospital or make-shift hospital. The AGA Parthipan and Dr Shanmugaraja can confirm this. I will quote another incident. When former EROS leader Balakumar and his family , who worked with LTTE for many years, tried to flee in a boat in Mullaitivu in 29th April   2009, the LTTE, knowing very well who he was, fired at them. His young daughter was critically injured and the bullets tore her forearm. Her hand is yet to heal.  

                These are facts  How do I know all this? I travelled Sri Lanka seven times last two  years widely in war zones in Wanni and talked to the victims who were trapped in the war zones. They knew that they were targeted both sides and they could not comprehend why the LTTE should expose to retaliatory fire in the NFZ. They could not understand why the LTTE turned the NFZ into a war zone.  The agents of LTTE in the Tamil diaspora also shed a lot of crocodile tears about the 300,000 IDPs. They described the IDP camps as concentration camps. Knowing the general conditions under which Sri Lankans live I can assure you that the conditions of the Tamils, particularly in the  in the IDP camps, were far superior to the slums of Colombo or even the conditions of the Sinhala villagers and hill country Tamils in remote areas. Even the Tamil MPs of Tamil Nadu and Indian journalists who visited the camps were convinced that the Sri Lankan authorities had done a very good job under trying conditions.

             Besides a comparison with the manner in which the government treated the Sinhala JVP rebels who took up arms in 1971 will reveal that the LTTErs received far better treatment than the JVPers. Most of them were incarcerated for more than four years.  However, I wish to emphasize that at this stage the government has to accept responsibility for their share of the civilian casualties and apologise for that and compensate the next of kin. In calling for justice it is fair and just to hold the leaders in the Tamil expatriate groups who financed, lobbied, and gave moral and material support to the LTTE to prolong their futile war. They too are liable for aiding and abetting a banned terrorist group. Justice demands that these leaders, posing as human rights activists in Western bases, too should be tried  for the crimes committed by the LTTE against their own people. On balance, it must be conceded that the elimination of the ruthless LTTE outfit was commendable. What Prabhakaran did to Sri Lanka was 100 time worse that Al-Qaida and Osama bin Laden did to America. Like America any democratic country had the right to eliminate threats to its sovereignty, peace and stability, transgressing, if necessary, international humanitarian law and international law. 

             India did it in Punjab and continues to do so in Kashmir. Russians did it in Chechnya. NATO allies are doing the same thing in Libya. America has done it in their war against Al Quaeda since 9/11. At the end of it all Sri Lankan Tamils now realise that their destiny is inextricably linked with Sri Lanka and Sinhala people. Violence is not the way out. It was the LTTE who sought the military solution and started the war- they have reaped the bloody harvest they sowed. Now we must genuinely commit themselves to the paths of peace, reconstruction and rehabilitation because violence will not lead anywhere except to the destruction of the remaining Tamils in the north and the east.

Dr. Noel Nadesan is Editor of the UTHAYAM.

 

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized

U.S. Senate Resolution: Sri Lanka’s Rare Display of Public Diplomacy

By Daya Gamage – Asian Tribune US National Correspondent
Washington, D.C. 08 March (Asiantribune.com):

At a time Sri Lanka is battling the rise of ‘Global Diplomatic Insurgency’, well replenished by the former acolytes of Prabhaharan’s terror-separatist group LTTE who are now covertly and overtly advocating a bifurcation of Sri Lanka within the Tamil Diaspora, Sri Lanka has displayed a rare public diplomacy victory in engaging in a fruitful dialogue with a group of U.S. Senators to move a resolution to bring the U.S. and Sri Lanka to the same page on ‘national issues’ concerning this South Asian nation.

The significance is that the Senate Republican Resolution moved and tabled on 27 February urges the Obama White House to recognize Sri Lanka’s sovereignty and maintain relations to safeguard it. The movers of the resolution expect the State Department to take note of what they have written in it.

The great Latin American revolutionary and Cuba’s most famous thinker Jose Marti in 1894 said: “Seeing afterwards is worthless. Foreseeing is what really counts…and being ready”.

The evidence is that the handlers of Sri Lanka’s external affairs and its Washington diplomatic facility seem to have done just that, to the delight of this Online Newspaper which has been advocating to use public affairs, public diplomacy and strategic communication in a more effective manner to ‘explain Sri Lanka’ to the rest of the world who have succumbed to misinformation, misrepresentation, half-truths and diabolical falsehood to haul the country all way to Geneva.

Unlike previous Senate Resolutions, one of which was on 6 February this year three weeks before the current one, Resolution 364 advocates a domestic mechanism rather than an international mechanism to ascertain the nature of the execution of the war during the final months in 2009.

Sri Lanka’s Washington diplomatic post moved forward in securing this language in the resolution, a rare triumph to this South Asian nation which has been battling the ‘Giants’ in the international community to safeguard her image in the globe.

Sri Lanka’s ambassador in Washington Ambassador Jaliya Wickramasuriya has thanked the U.S. Senators who introduced Senate Resolution 364 recognizing Sri Lanka’s success in restoration of democracy , rebuilding and reconciliation after the dawn of peace since 2009.

In a letter addressed to the Senators, the Ambassador called the resolution a very a positive gesture of goodwill and understanding towards Sri Lanka from these senior representatives of the American people. He underscored the facts enumerated in the Resolution such as the continued peace in the entire country , restoration of democracy and the concrete steps taken towards reconciliation that represent the true situation in Sri Lanka.

” I wanted to express my gratitude to you for co-sponsoring Senate Resolution 364. This resolution is a fair and balanced and one that reflects the actual progress made by the Government of Sri Lanka”, Ambassador Wickramasuriya said in the letter.

The Ambassador is also of the view that adopting such a positive resolution on Sri Lanka by US Senators would certainly be seen in Sri Lanka as moral encouragement to continue the process of healing and reconciliation.

“I am appreciative that this resolution acknowledges the establishment of the Lessons Learnt and Reconciliation Commission and the multitude of categories it addresses. This resolution is a historically significant piece of legislation that I believe will enhance the US – Sri Lanka relationship’.

Ambassador Jaliya Wickramasuriya also thanks all Sri Lankan-Americans who have been tirelessly working to keep their legislators informed about the true story on Sri Lanka. He opines the Senate Resolution 364 is clear evidence that their endeavors have been successful.

Further, Ambassador Wickramasuriya requests the Sri Lankan community to continue updating their political representatives in the U.S. on the current positive developments in Sri Lanka and encourage them to visit the country and see the progress for themselves.

The Resolution Calls on President Obama to adopt balanced & comprehensive policy towards Sri Lanka.

Eleven senior Members of the United States Senate introduced a bipartisan Senate Resolution (S. Res. 364) on Thursday, Feb 27 expressing support for Sri Lanka’s internal reconciliation process and the significant overall progress the Country has made since the end of the civil war–some 5 years ago.

The Senators also called on the President of the United States to develop a “comprehensive and well balanced policy towards Sri Lanka”, supportive of promoting U.S. interests including respect for human rights, democracy the rule of law as well as taking onto account the United States economic and security interests.

Senate Resolution 364 recognizes the immense suffering of the Sri Lankan people caused by the 26-year conflict, and the genuine aspiration of the government to prevent any outside force from triggering a reemergence of similar situations that are now behind us; but instead look to the future through enhanced national unity and reconciliation . A special recognition has been given to the establishment of the Lessons Learnt and Reconciliation Commission (LLRC) and the significance of implementing its recommendations.

Sri Lanka President Mahinda Rajapaksa appointed the LLRC in May 2010, following the end of the three decade long terrorist conflict. The Commission Report was released in November 2011 and tabled in the Parliament in December 2011. The Cabinet of Ministers approved the National Plan of Action to implement the recommendations of the LLRC in July 2012.

Senate Resolution 364 underscores that the Government of Sri Lanka has made significant progress in implementing the LLRC recommendations within a limited time. With a special reference to the first ever elections held in the Northern Province of Sri Lanka in September 2013, the Resolution commends the reestablishment of representative democracy in the conflict-ridden areas through elections.

“ …the elections allowed the people of the North of Sri Lanka to exercise their political rights that had been withheld from them for more than 20 years by the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE) and resulted in a clear victory for the provincial wing of the Tamil National Alliance”

The Resolution however remains concerned over possible restrictions to the media freedom and religious freedom of Sri Lanka. It highlights that a peaceful and just society reconciled through a political settlement addressing the needs of all ethnic group should be achieved by a process driven by the people of Sri Lanka themselves.

The Resolution calls on the United States Government and the International community to offer meaningful assistance to the Government of Sri Lanka to make its domestic endeavors toward reconciliation more effective, while respecting the country’s sovereignty, stability and security.

The Resolution encourages Sri Lanka to consider a mechanism similar to the South African Truth & Reconciliation Commission to heal the wounds of war. The Government of Sri Lanka is further urged to take necessary steps to improve religious and media freedom in the country.

The Asian Tribune considers this a very positive development toward Sri Lanka undertaken by Washington’s Sri Lanka diplomatic mission and to the delight of this Online Daily Newspaper which has continually advocated the adoption of a sharp diplomatic reach to negate the maneuvers of activists/professionals within the Tamil Diaspora who were once supplying ‘Material Support’ to the lethal terrorist movement Tamil Tigers in the form of raising funds, providing expert advice, propagating the LTTE agenda and promoting the procurement of military weapons all of which were in violating United Stated Federal Laws.

– Asian Tribune –

The U.S. Capitol Building which houses the Senate and House
donate_button.png
diconary view

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized

Minister Peiris Rejects High Commissioner’s Report: “Those who exalt its virtues only seek to inflict harm on the reconciliation process”

Minister of External Affairs and Leader of the Sri Lanka delegation Prof. G.L. Peiris, delivering the National Statement at the High Level Segment of the 25th Session of the UN Human Rights Council in Geneva today (5 March 2014), rejected the Report of the High Commissioner in its entirety, saying it was fundamentally flawed and disregarded the substantial progress made by the Government during the five years which have elapsed since the end of the thirty year conflict against terrorism.

He said it also pays scant regard to the complexities and local nuances of a sensitive reconciliation process, while eroding the confidence of the people of Sri Lanka by the constant changing of unjustifiable demands. Moreover, they persist in an attitude which is clearly disproportionate to the circumstances and inconsistent with the treatment of comparable situations. It is much to be regretted that the High Commissioner’s Report and those who exalt its virtues only seek to inflict harm on the reconciliation process by bringing about a polarisation of the Sri Lankan society.

The Minister said the few references made in the Council welcoming the High Commissioner’s Report on Sri Lanka, including at the highest level of the UN are regrettable, particularly considering that it is based on questionable and baseless material including what has been processed outside the UN framework. He noted that the Panel of Experts Report which was the culmination of a private consultation that the Secretary General sought for his own advice, and is not the product of any intergovernmental process, has been extensively resorted to by the High Commissioner in her Report to the Council, in a bid to legitimize it within the UN framework despite the lack of mandate in this regard. However, if the initiative taken on Sri Lanka at this juncture by the OHCHR is to be the basis on which the country is to be judged, it will clearly be a travesty of justice.

In this context, the Minister said Sri Lanka greatly valued the sentiments expressed in the Council by countries who have similar experiences with regard to reconciliation, that Sri Lanka be provided with the requisite time and space to address its own process domestically in a comprehensive manner as opposed to those who continue to pay disproportionate attention to Sri Lanka, based on agendas driven by political motives.

At the High Level Segment of the 25th Session of the Human Rights Council 05 March 2014, Geneva, while delivering the National Statement Prof. G.L. Peiris, Minister of External Affairs and Sri Lanka’s Leader of the delegation said as follows:

Mr. President,

Madam High Commissioner,

Excellencies,

Ladies and Gentlemen,

I am pleased to deliver this statement on behalf of the Government of Sri Lanka. May I at the outset congratulate you Mr. President, as well as Members of the Bureau on your election as office bearers of this Council. I pledge my delegation’s support to you at all times in the discharge of your office. Sri Lanka also reiterates its continued support to the High Commissioner in the discharge of her mandate as contained in GA Resolution 48/141, to the OHCHR, and to the work of this Council.

Mr. President,

It is imperative that the Human Rights Council remains a credible and independent arbiter in dealing with global human rights situations. All human rights are universal, indivisible, interdependent and interrelated, and must be treated in a fair and equitable manner, without the privileging of one set of rights over another. It is for these reasons, that economic, social and cultural rights which are at the core of sustainable development need to gain the same level of emphasis and legitimacy as civil and political rights. As we celebrate the 28th anniversary of the adoption by the United Nations General Assembly of the Declaration on the Right to Development, there needs to be a more robust approach to promote effective international cooperation with regard to the right to development and the elimination of obstacles to its enjoyment.

Sri Lanka shares the concern of the High Commissioner as well as States on the challenges faced by her Office on account of resource constraints.

At the same time, we remain deeply concerned that the lack of financial independence of the OHCHR leads to the erosion of independence in its overall functioning. For example, the disproportionate attention being paid to country-specific action in the Council which selectively targets some countries, while situations, human rights violations and restrictive practices in other parts of the world that warrant more urgent and immediate attention and action remain conveniently ignored, is a matter of serious concern. The stark reality is that the continuation and proliferation of the practice of the selective adoption of country-specific resolutions in the Council is a tool that exploits human rights for political purposes. Regrettably, a similar pattern is evident in the case of continued action on Sri Lanka in this Council. We reiterate that such politicized action is contrary to the high purposes and principles of the Council and must be arrested. We believe that additional budgetary allocations from regular funding would lessen the OHCHR’s dependence on voluntary contributions and earmarked funding and thus would allow it to function in an independent manner.

Mr. President, notwithstanding Sri Lanka’s non-recognition of the country-specific action taken against our country at the behest of a few countries in this Council, without basis, and without the consent of the country concerned, Sri Lanka has continued its proactive engagement with the UN, this Council and the OHCHR, in a spirit of transparency, cooperation and dialogue. My delegation has consistently shared with this body continued progress in the reconciliation process, regrettably in a politicised environment due to vested interests of a few. There has been significant progress in the reconciliation process over the past 12 months and approximately 19 months since the National Plan of Action (NPoA) to implement the domestic reconciliation mechanism, the Lessons Learnt and Reconciliation Commission (LLRC), became operational.

Mr. President, in July 2012, the Government accepted 91 recommendations of the LLRC for implementation within the framework of the NPoA. In July 2013, an additional 53 recommendations were accepted by the Government, making the total number of LLRC recommendations under implementation 144, out of the 285 Paragraphs contained in Chapter 9 of the LLRC Report titled ‘Summary of the Principal Observations and Recommendations’, the latter comprising the sum total of observations and recommendations of the LLRC.

The implementation of the LLRC recommendations clustered by the Government under five themes – {(IHL issues (07 recommendations), Human Rights (54 recommendations), Land Return & Resettlement (24 recommendations), Restitution/Compensatory relief (09 recommendations), Reconciliation (50 recommendations)} — is overseen by an Inter-Ministerial Task Force under the supervision of the Secretary to the President. The implementation of the LLRC NPoA is a dynamic process which continues to evolve over time to culminate in the accomplishment of the recommendations. This process is envisaged to incorporate additional measures and modifications of the activities as and when required to fulfill the respective recommendations.

When these achievements are juxtaposed with the nearly 30 long years of terrorist conflict, any objective observer would agree Sri Lanka’s achievements would indeed match, if not surpass those of any country emerging from similar conditions. This is no mean feat for a developing country.

Allow me to take this opportunity to elucidate the Council on the post-conflict developments in the country.

The Commission on Disappearances was appointed on 12 August 2013 for a term of six months to conduct inquiries and investigations as necessary, and to submit a report containing its findings and recommendations. The Commission requested an extension to its mandate and has been granted a further six months until 12 August 2014 in order to undertake a comprehensive inquiry and complete its work.

The hearings of the Commission commenced in January 2014, following two extensions granted to the public to make submissions (i.e., deadline of 31 October 2013 was extended to 30 November.2013 and 31 December2013, respectively). The extensions were granted, both to accommodate complaints received, and in response to (a) requests made by persons in the North and East.

Since the establishment of the Commission on Disappearances on August 12, 2013, it has issued Public Notices on three occasions (i.e., October, November and December 2013) in all three languages and in all major newspapers calling on relatives of missing persons to submit their complaints to the Commission. The final Public Notice for receiving complaints lapsed on December 31, 2013. However, the Commission continues to receive complaints, all of which are acknowledged, and will be investigated.

As per information obtained from the Commission, nearly 16,000 complaints have been received thus far. The Commission is scheduled to conduct public sittings in the Batticaloa District in the Eastern Province later in March 2014, covering 56 Grama Niladhari Divisions (Village level Administrative Units) in the district. Previously, the Commission conducted public sittings and heard oral evidence in the Kilinochchi District in the Northern Province in January 2014, and in Jaffna District in February 2014. All Commission hearings are open to public and they have always been facilitated full access to the hearings.

The Commission conducts public sittings on a regular basis in the Northern and Eastern provinces in order to hear evidence from relatives of missing persons. Once the Commission has sufficient material, it will submit a report to the Government.

It must be pointed out that on behalf of the Commission, the Government sought the assistance of countries host to Sri Lankan asylum seekers for their details in order to process the information on alleged disappearances. However, we have been informed by these countries that for reasons of privacy they are unable to accede to the request. Undoubtedly this position hampers the progress of the work by the Commission in reaching finality in regard to its investigations. With regard to the General Allegation letter dated 14th February 2014 by the Chair-Rapporteur of the Working Group on Enforced or Involuntary Disappearances on the conduct and implementation of this Commission of Inquiry to investigate alleged abductions or disappearances, the Government has provided a detailed response on 1st March 2014, substantively refuting all unsubstantiated allegations contained therein. We have requested that our response be circulated as a UN document of this Council session, given its relevance and importance.

The ICRC which has been working in Sri Lanka since the 1990s, continues to be engaged in the country’s post-conflict phase on residual issues of relevance. The ICRC continues its engagement with Sri Lanka on matters relating to alleged disappearances and missing persons, including work with regard to enumeration of disappearances, support to people with disabilities and female-headed households, and issues related to detention. The collaboration with the ICRC on the issue of disappearances includes studying practical methodologies adopted by other countries in dealing with cases of alleged disappearances. Issues pertaining to families of persons identified as “missing” or “disappeared” are being addressed through a mechanism to implement the findings of a “Family Needs Assessment” conducted by the ICRC in 2013.

Sri Lanka also benefits from technical assistance from the ICRC in the said areas. The ICRC has met on two occasions with the Commission of Inquiry on Disappearances where, inter alia, their experience in comparable situations in other countries has been shared. The Government’s cooperation with the ICRC is also in fulfillment of the LLRC’s recommendations 9.48, 9.50 “that the law enforcement authorities, in cooperation with relevant agencies, especially the ICRC, to trace the whereabouts of missing persons and ensure reunification with their families”.

Processing of data of the Island-wide Census to gather information on deaths/injuries to persons and property damages that have occurred from 1982 to date as a direct or indirect result of the internal conflicts is in progress. The Preliminary Report, based on the enumerator summaries, is anticipated to be released in a few weeks’ time. An additional budgetary allocation of Rs 150 million was granted in January 2014 to the Department of Census and Statistics to complete the Census.

Non-Summary Inquiry commenced with regard to the Five Students of Trincomalee case on 9 September 2013. As at present, the evidence of 14 witnesses is concluded. The witnesses include members of the Police, Army, Navy and a relative of one of the deceased. Affidavits of 07 official witnesses have been tendered as evidence. Summons have been issued on 14 witnesses to appear on the next date of inquiry on 06 March 2014. In addition, as 07 persons listed as witnesses for the prosecution are at present living overseas, steps have been taken to locate their present whereabouts to serve summons. With regard to the Muttur (ACF) case, following instructions by the Attorney-General, action has been taken to identify and record statements of army commandos and civil society members. A further statement had been recorded from a Member of the Local Council and an employee of the council. The Criminal Investigation Department (CID) has obtained copies of photographs and a report prepared by the Additional Director of the Consortium of Humanitarian Agencies (CHA) to clarify the issue of the number of bodies found at the crime scene. In addition, 12 employees of ACF have been interviewed and their statements recorded. Further investigations are being conducted under the guidance of the Attorney General.

The First Part of the Army Court of Inquiry (COI), investigating allegations on civilian casualties concluded in February 2013. The inquiry concluded that instances of shelling referred to in the LLRC Report were not caused by the Sri Lanka Army and that civilian casualties may have occurred due to unlawful acts by the LTTE. These acts include targeting civilians fleeing to the safety of Army-held areas and likely routes of escape, dropping of artillery rounds fired by ill-trained LTTE gunners on to civilian concentrations. The COI has indicated that further evidence, if presented, will be examined.

The Court of Inquiry appointed by the Army is now addressing the second part of their mandate, comprising the Channel 4 allegations, which commenced in March 2013. The identification of potential witnesses is currently in progress and, once identified, they would be formally called as witnesses. It may be noted that the LLRC, in its Observations/Recommendations on the Channel 4 video,inter alia expressed its regret at “the fact that the broadcaster did not respond positively to the request made by the Commission to provide more comprehensive information”, and noted that “greater cooperation by the organisation that provided to the television stations these video images and by the producers/broadcasters that aired this footage is essential to establish the facts of the case”.

Sri Lanka has initiated action to prepare legislation with regard to Witness and Victim Protection. Consequent to extensive consultation in this regard, including examination by the Cabinet Sub-Committee on Legislation and action being taken thereon by the Legal Draftsman, finalization of legislation is in progress. The need for legislation for the criminalization of disappearances is being examined by a Committee appointed by the Ministry of Justice, in consultation with the Attorney General.

A total area of 1,980 sqkm, which is 96 % of the areas identified for demining have been cleared as at the end of December 2013. 70 % of the demining was carried out by the Sri Lanka Army.

This paved the way for the expeditiousresettlement of internally displaced persons. 297,000 Internally Displaced Persons who were housed at Menik Farm Welfare Village immediately after the conflict in 2009 have now been fully resettled and this facility was closed in September 2012. Action is being taken to expedite resettlement of the remaining 7,094 IDP families in the North and the East. Of this, 5,585 are currently staying with host families. The Government is also working towards finding durable solutions to resettle approximately 75,000 Muslim who were forcibly evicted from the Northern Province by the LTTE in an ethnic cleansing exercise, over 20 years ago. Further, a study is underway with the collaboration of the UNHCR to establish whether there are any hitherto unreported displaced persons and the report is expected by end March 2014.

As recommended by the LLRC, the Government has mobilized funding for restitution and the provision of compensatory relief for those affected by the conflict. SLRs. 392 million has been provided for the payment of compensation from 2010 to 2012, and SLRs. 204 million in 2013. The 2014 budget has allocated SLRs. 475 million to continue the implementation of this recommendation. While the bulk of funding for these activities was provided by the Government, the support of international partners also needs to be acknowledged. Compensation schemes have also been implemented by the Rehabilitation Authority to provide relief for the next of kin affected by the death or injury of those involved with the LTTE. Such relief is also provided in cases of property damage due to the conflict, including religious places.

In line with the LLRC recommendations, persons with disabilities in conflict affected areas receive benefits from Government schemes providing housing and livelihood support. Under the “Housing Assistance Programme for persons with disabilities”, 152 families in the North and 502 families in the East have been provided Rs 250,000 each to construct houses with accessibility facilities. A sum of Rs 76 million has been incurred by the Government for this purpose.

With regard to livelihood support, nearly 4,000 families in the North and East having a disabled member receive a monthly cash allowance under the “Monthly Livelihood Assistance Programme”. Also, 209 persons in the Eastern Province and 539 disabled persons in the Northern Province have been assisted to set up self-employment ventures under the “Self Employment Assistance Programme for persons with disabilities”. Fifty disabled youth from Kilinochchi have been selected for training in job-oriented vocational disciplines by the Social Services Department.

Land is one of the most complex and sensitive residual issues of the conflict and continues to be addressed. In line with the LLRC recommendation, the Government is implementing the Land Commissioner General’s Special Land Circular which provides for the granting of legal ownership of land to those IDPs who have been resettled. In January 2014 alone, 3,623 land requests have been received in the Northern Province. Of this, 2,321 have been resolved, making a total of 24,389 resolutions of 147,504 land requests to date. In the Eastern Province, 490 land requests have been received in January (total 11,662 to date) and 83 have been resolved (total 1,260 to date).

The former High Security Zones (HSZ) have ceased to exist. Palaly cantonment is now the only area in which some security restrictions remain although civilians have unrestricted access to Palaly airport and KKS harbour. Similarly, former HSZ in the Eastern Province, located in the Sampoor area from 2007 has been reduced in extent by 65 per cent and declared a Licensed Zone under the Board of investment.

As at January 2014 the Government has released 19,322 acres of private land and 2,518 acres of State owned land in the Northern Province which were hitherto used by the military. In the East, the Government has released 689 acres of private land and 3,222 acres of State land. Therefore the total figure of lands released in the North and the East amounts to 20,011 acres of private land and 5,740 acres of State land.

The Terms of Reference for a Fourth Land Commission are under preparation. Amendment to the Prescription Ordinance will be presented in Parliament by April, 2014. Steps are being taken to Gazette the necessary Orders under the Special Mediation Boards Act, to establish relevant Boards in certain areas where the armed conflict prevailed, and address certain identified land disputes that have arisen in those areas. This amply demonstrates that allegations of ‘land grabbing’ taking place in the former conflict-affected areas are entirely unfounded.

Housing programmes to reconstruct and renovate houses have been implemented by the Government in the Northern and Eastern Provinces. Some of these programme are being carried out with the assistance of bilateral partners.

The Northern Province has recorded a Provincial GDP (PDGP) growth rate of 23.6 per cent in 2013 contributing 4.3 per cent to the National Economy up from 3.7 per cent in 2011 while the Eastern Province registered the second growth of 26.6 per cent in the PGDP with an increase in its GDP share to 6.9 in 2013 from 5.8 per cent in 2011.

Unemployment rates have declined significantly in the Northern and Eastern provinces in the post-conflict phase. This is illustrated by the fact that the unemployment rate in the Northern Province has declined from 6.1 per cent to 5.2 per cent, and in the Eastern provinces from 15.5 per cent to 4.9 per cent in the period 2005 – 2012. Food ratio is one of the principle indicators used to measure living standards of a population. Food ratios for Northern and Eastern provinces have declined from 59 per cent to 44.8 per cent and 57 per cent to 55 per cent respectively.

Under the Urban Development Programme (Pura Neguma), 84 per cent of total investment in the North and 77 per cent of total investment in the East were channelled to create access to rural roads.

The reconstructed railway line from Omanthai to Kilinochchi was commissioned and dedicated to the public of Sri Lanka on 14 September 2013. The second segment, Kilinochchi – Pallai, of approximately 30 kilometres, was added to the rail network yesterday.

The Chunnakam Grid substation was opened connecting the Jaffna peninsula with the national grid after a lapse of two decades. Over 63 Mw of power is to be transmitted to the Jaffna peninsula through the substation for which the Government has spent SLRs. 1,800 million.

The new Oluvil Port Development project in the East, constructed at a cost of Rs. 7,000 million, was opened in September 2013.

A 10-year National Plan for a Trilingual Sri Lanka was launched in January 2012 for the implementation of the Trilingual Policy. In line with this Plan, the Government has initiated a program to make public sector workers bilingual, with the ability to converse in both Sinhala and Tamil. Civil servants and Police officers have been recruited and trained to serve the public in the North and the East in the language of their choice. Special focus is being placed on enabling police personnel serving in the North to have a sound knowledge of Tamil. The Police Department has deployed 900 Tamil police officers and 1,500 Sinhala police officers fluent in the Tamil language in police stations in the Northern and Eastern Provinces. Preparations are also under way to recruit 150 Tamil speaking Women Police Officers in 2014 to augment all Units of the Women and Children Bureau at all Police Stations in the Northern and Eastern Provinces. In addition, Government officers are regularly encouraged, and participate in language competency training.

The National Department for Registration of Persons has taken measures to issue computerized bilingual identity cards in the two national languages, Sinhala and Tamil. While identity cards of minority communities are already being issued in two languages for their convenience, the new decision will be applicable to all identity cards, as a corrective measure and to ensure equity for all citizens.

There have been allegations on changing the demography of the Northern areas by resettling people other than Tamils. In the early 1980s, before the ethnic cleansing by the LTTE, over 75,000 Muslims and over 35,000 Sinhalese co-existed peacefully in the North of Sri Lanka. When the conflict escalated, almost all these civilians either left or were forcibly evicted by the LTTE. Today, 51 per cent of the population in Colombo city is non-Sinhalese which is testimony to the fact that the people of Sri Lanka can freely choose where they want to live, and there are no efforts to create mono-ethnic niches within the country. This is further substantiated by the fact that only 32 per cent of the Tamil population live in the North while the remainder live among other communities in the rest of the country.

Of the 12,288 former LTTE combatants that have surrendered or came under court order, 96.9 per cent have been rehabilitated and integrated into society as of 03 March 2014. Only 157 are currently undergoing rehabilitation and 85 remain under legal proceedings.

Following the termination of military operations against the LTTE in 2009, the Government has undertaken a gradual process of reduction of military presence in former conflict affected areas.It may be noted that the total strength of the military in the Northern Province has been reduced by approximately 30 per cent from 2009 to October 2013, a process which is continuing to take place. In addition, in the Eastern Province approximately 26 per cent reduction of troop presence has been undertaken.

There have been repeated attempts to draw a non-existent correlation between the presence of the military and vulnerability of women to sexual harassment and violence in the North. This position is not borne out by available statistics. It must be categorically stated that Sri Lanka has a zero tolerance policy on sexual harassment and abuse of women and children. The Government has taken concrete action in all reported cases where Sri Lankan security forces personnel have been involved and will continue to do so.

The military has no involvement in civilian administration. The civil administration system in the North and East is fully functional. The culmination of this process was the successful conclusion ofProvincial Council elections in the North in September 2013 and the establishment of the Northern Provincial Council. However, it is regrettable that external entities think it fit to pressurize the Government with regard to that Councils staffing, and even on the appointment of the Governor, which is the prerogative of the Executive. Such pressure on the conduct of governance are unacceptable and not in keeping with the conduct of international relations.

The Parliamentary Select Committee (PSC) was set up to arrive at a final political solution with participation by 21 political parties who are represented in Parliament. The terms of reference for the PSC were formulated jointly with the Tamil National Alliance (TNA). It is unfortunate that the TNA persistently refuses to participate in this process. It should be recognized that this approach by the TNA is a hindrance to any settlement. However, despite the non-participation of the TNA, the PSC continues with its deliberations.

All people living in Sri Lanka enjoy freedom of religion, which is a constitutionally guaranteed right. The Government of Sri Lanka remains committed to ensuring that this right is protected. This is demonstrated by the action taken to address reported incidents of disturbances in the recent past.

The four major religions have co-existed side by side in Sri Lanka for centuries. Regrettably, there is an effort to project the sporadic incidents of attacks aimed at religious places, as a sign of religious hatred and intolerance. It should be noted that these incidents have targeted places of worship of all four religions. The Government does not condone any of those activities. With regard to reported attacks, 16 relate to Buddhist, 41 to Christian/Catholic and 20 Muslim places of worship during the period from June 2009 to December 2013. Judicial inquiries are in progress with regard to 62 per cent of the attacks, and 22 cases have been concluded. In all such instances where police complaints have been lodged, police have taken legal steps to produce suspects before Magistrates. Whenever credible information relating to incidents has been made available, the Government has taken appropriate action.

The recent incident in Hikkaduwa in southern Sri Lanka is a case in point. Police complaints were lodged regarding the incident which caused damage to buildings of the Assembly of God and Holy Calvary Sectors during a public protest. Police forthwith initiated legal proceedings and twenty one persons including Buddhist monks have surrendered responding to the Court Order. The case is scheduled to be called on 17 March 2014 for further hearings.

Additionally, in keeping with Sri Lanka’s societal, cultural and historical norms, regular dialogue continues to take place at various levels to ensure interfaith harmony and understanding amongst its diverse populace.

Administration of justice, inclusive of independence of the judiciary is constitutionally enjoined, and any infringement of these entrenched rights is visited with sanctions. Judges hold office during good behavior, and proven misbehavior or incapacity triggers constitutionally entrenched disciplinary proceedings. Any procedure adopted in this regard has been in accordance with the Constitution and such action in compliance with constitutional provisions cannot be regarded as undermining the independence of the judiciary.

The Government of Sri Lanka is fully committed to the protection of human rights defenders. The wide range of interactions that the High Commissioner had with civil society during her visit, as well as the active engagement of civil society from Sri Lanka in successive Council sessions is testimony to the vibrant nature of Sri Lanka’s civil society and the freedoms they enjoy.

Mr. President, during the period under review Sri Lanka has continued its proactive engagement with the Council, the OHCHR and the international community in a spirit of transparency, cooperation and dialogue. The past year has also witnessed the visit of High Commissioner Navi Pillay to Sri Lanka on a week-long, comprehensive visit which included travel to the former theatre of conflict in the North and the East, as well as the visit of the Special Rapporteur on the Human Rights of IDPs Dr. Chaloka Beyani whose visit too included travel to the North. Sri Lanka also hosted the Commonwealth Heads of Government Meeting in Colombo last November where 54 of the states in this august gathering participated. These comprehensive visits and exposure enabled Sri Lanka to demonstrate first hand the very tangible progress on the ground with regard to reconciliation.

Sri Lanka has consistently interacted with the United Nations system and the wider international community in a spirit of goodwill and cooperation. It is in this context that Sri Lanka remains committed to a positive engagement with the Council and its mechanisms, including special procedures.

Sri Lanka’s Ambassador / Permanent Representative in Geneva has engaged in regular dialogue with special procedures mandate holders including, inter alia, the Special Rapporteur on Truth, Justice, Reparation and Guarantees of Non-recurrence and the Special Rapporteur on Extrajudicial, Summary, or Arbitrary Executions.

Sri Lanka has also conducted regular meetings with the Working Group on Enforced or Involuntary Disappearances (WGEID), including with the participation of senior representation from the Attorney General’s Department. Since January 2012, the Government has transmitted responses on 1,042 cases to the WGEID. Additionally, an Inter-Agency Task Force established comprising the Ministries of External Affairs, Defence and the Attorney General’s Department continues to respond to the Working Group and provide clarification on cases. It is pertinent to note that 80 per cent of the caseload of the WGEID under consideration dates back over 20 years to the pre-1990 period.

Similarly, Sri Lanka has proactively engaged with the Working Group on Arbitrary Detention (WGAD). During the period from January 2012 to date, the Government has responded to 9 of the 11 communications transmitted by the Working Group with regard to issues of alleged detention. Additionally, Sri Lanka also responded by its communication dated 28 February 2014 to the Questionnaire transmitted to delegations by the Working Group on the ‘Right to anyone deprived of his or her liberty by arrest or detention’ inclusive of examples containing detailed information on cases applicable.

From January 2013 to date, Sri Lanka has responded to 20 communications from special procedures (both country specific and general) excluding communications by the WGEID and the WGAD, the latter having been collated separately as indicated earlier. From 2012 to date, Sri Lanka has responded to 71 per cent of the communications received from special procedures addressed to the Government on various issues with specific and detailed information, excluding communications from the WGEID and the WGAD. The Government continues to endeavor to respond to all communications by special procedures in a spirit of cooperation, transparency and dialogue.

The request for visit by the Working Group on Enforced or Involuntary Disappearances is under consideration as with other similar requests from special procedures, which will be processed as mutually convenient and taking into account national imperatives and initiatives. It is relevant to recall the continuation of the mandate of the Commission on Disappearances. This domestic mechanism needs to be given adequate time. As we have previously informed this august body, we will continue to schedule pending visits of special procedures mandate holders following the visit of the High Commissioner. In line with this commitment, the Government has, as of now, extended three invitations to special procedures since August 2013 including to the Special Rapporteur on the Human Rights of IDPs, the Special Rapporteur on Education, and the Special Rapporteur on the Human Rights of Migrants. The Special Rapporteur on Education has informed of his inability to undertake this visit this year.

In line with its treaty body commitments,Sri Lanka continues to engage and submit its periodic reports to the respective treaty bodies. Sri Lanka’s 3rd and 4th Report to the Committee Against Torture came under consideration in November 2011. Sri Lanka submitted its 5th report under the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) in October 2012, and in September 2013, its response to the Concluding Observations of the Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW). Currently, the Government’s 5th report under the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR) is under preparation. The Government is also engaged in initial preparations to submit its reports in 2015 under the Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC), the Convention on the Elimination of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW) and the Convention Against Torture (CAT).

As previously committed at its UPR second cycle in November 2012, the Government agreed to implement recommendations of the LLRC in line with the LLRC National Plan of Action (NPoA), and also to make available financial and other resources to meet this objective. Additionally, Sri Lanka made 19 voluntary commitments in relation to the UPR, of which 12 have direct relevance to the reconciliation process and implementation of the recommendations of the LLRC.

Sri Lanka remains open to consideration of technical cooperation from the OHCHR in some key areas in reconciliation, in line with the needs of the country, in the context of implementing the NPoA of the LLRC, as well as the accepted recommendations of Sri Lanka’s UPR 2nd cycle. In keeping with HRC Resolution 5/1, offers of technical assistance need to be made in consultation with and with the concurrence of the receiving State. Sri Lanka has also undertaken commitments on technical cooperation under the UN Development Assistance Framework 2013-2017.

Further, to identify the specific needs of those who have returned or resettled but are still having specific needs linked to their displacement and to reconcile the discrepancies in relation to the number of remaining IDPs to be resettled in the country, action has already been initiated to conduct a Joint Needs Assessment (JNA) by OCHA in consultation with the Presidential Task Force for Resettlement, Development and Security in the Northern Province. This issue was also referred to during the visit of the Special Rapporteur on the Human Rights of IDPs to Sri Lanka in December 2013. Consequent to a series of meetings, formal approval for the Joint Needs Assessment (JNA) has been communicated to the UNOCHA. A letter of Agreement is being prepared between the Government and the UN Country Team to give effect to the JNA. UNOCHA has already appointed consultants to plan out and monitor the whole process.

A key UNDP supported program, Strengthening Enforcement of Law, Access to Justice and Social Integration (SELAJSI) which is a joint initiative of the Ministries of National Languages and Social Integration; Justice; Rehabilitation and Prison Reforms; and Child Development and Women’s Affairs was launched by the UN Assistant Secretary-General, Regional Bureau for Asia and the Pacific of the UNDP in February 2014. The programme aims at ensuring that gains in the justice sector are institutionalized, systemized and scaled-up.

Ministry of Justice is implementing a programme in collaboration with UNICEF and relevant government stakeholders and civil societies to strengthen and enhance child protection by establishing special Child Friendly Children’s Courts.

Additionally, several international organizations are engaged by the Government to provide assistance to war-affected persons through focal line Ministries. Examples include World Bank collaboration with the Ministry of Social Services under “Diri Saviya Project” to provide financial assistance to the disabled; UNICEF assistance to implement the concept of Social Care Centers in the Northern and the Eastern provinces; UNICEF assistance to the Ministry of Education to implement the “Be Safe” awareness programme to protect children from abuse in schools in the Northern Province; UNICEF assistance for vocational training in Mannar and Mullaitivu Training Centres; GIZ assistance to the Ministry of Education to create awareness on psycho-social care for Education Directors, Principals and Teachers in Northern and Eastern Provinces; GIZ assistance to set up vocational training centres in Northern province; Canadian Government assistance to the National Languages Project; World University Services of Canada support to set up 03 Vocational Centres and 03 Recognition of Prior Learning Centres for re-settled people in Northern province; ICRC assistance to rehabilitated LTTE members under the ICRC livelihood assistance programme; INGO and NGO collaboration with the Ministry of Health to promote awareness on mental health and nutrition among women and children in conflict affected areas; and Government, UN agencies, INGOs, NGOs collaboration in constructing and renovating houses for returnees, etc.

Notwithstanding these achievements, judging by the persistent demands made on Sri Lanka, as well as the assertion that domestic mechanisms have failed, it is clear that there is no acknowledgement of this very tangible progress.

Regrettably, as much as Sri Lanka has endeavoured to cooperate with the OHCHR, there have been a series of actions, in particular the introduction of country specific action on Sri Lanka in this Council, that have shown lack of sensitivity in dealing with delicate situations and exposed the unfair and biased manner in which issues pertaining to Sri Lanka have been addressed.

Detailing of two of the most recent examples suffice.

– In September 2013, in contravention of HRC resolution 5/1, specifically Rule 14 (47) and Paragraph 117 which casts a duty on the OHCHR that acts as the Secretariat of the Council to prepare and circulate documents for consideration by the Council in a timely manner, the text of the Oral Update of the High Commissioner was made available to Sri Lanka for response as the state concerned, with less than 20 hours remaining for its consideration in the Council.

– In February 2014, the non-adherance by the OHCHR to the request by Sri Lanka to publish the Comments by the State on the Report of the High Commissioner (A/HRC/25/23) as an Addendum to the Report in the current session in spite of existence of clear precedent in this regard and no rule to the contrary governing Addenda and submission of comments by the State on HC / SG Country Reports, is again in contravention of the Methods of Work of the Council which clearly state at Paragraph 110 of the IB package that “The methods of work, pursuant to General Assembly resolution 60/251 should be transparent, impartial, equitable, fair, pragmatic; lead to clarity, predictability, and inclusiveness. They may also be updated and adjusted over time.”

Mr. President, regrettably, these are examples of patent bias demonstrated by the OHCHR in addressing issues in relation to Sri Lanka. The OHCHR’s most recent act of placing the Comments of the Government of Sri Lanka on the Report A/HRC/25/23 under ‘Communications from Governments’, has seriously impeded the visibility and integrity of between the Report and the Comments by the State. It not only reflects a lack of transparency, but also clearly denies Sri Lanka a level playing field to present its point of view. The unequal treatment meted out to Sri Lanka by the OHCHR in the above instance defeats the very principles upheld by the Council.

The procedural concerns that Sri Lanka has raised with the President of the Council with regard to the above anomalies have wider relevance to member and observer states of the Council. They also raise serious questions on politicization and collusion of interests against Sri Lanka.

Mr. President, the Government of Sri Lanka categorically rejects the High Commissioner’s Report (A/HRC/25/23) emanating from resolution 22/1. It may be recalled that from the adoption of resolution 22/1, we upheld its contravention of GA resolution 60/251 as well as the Council resolutions 5/1 and 5/2 which guide the work and method of engagement of the Council.

Sri Lanka will share its observations on the substantive content of the Report (A/HRC/25/23), including the considerable factual inaccuracies and misperceptions contained therein, during its consideration on 26 March. However, for purposes of record there are some aspects to which, I wish to draw your attention to at this juncture.

The High Commissioner’s Report has exceeded its mandate by making reference to and recommendations on numerous issues extraneous to the resolution. Additionally, the recommendations contained in the Report are arbitrary, intrusive and of a political nature, and are not placed within the ambit of the LLRC, as demonstrated by the call to establish an international inquiry mechanism. Further, this recommendation is in contravention of her mandate granted by GA Resolution 48/141, particularly Articles 3(a) and 4(g). In the Government’s detailed “Comments” on the Report, it has also regretted that the High Commissioner has raised concerns regarding a range of issues based on information of questionable veracity and conclusions arrived at in a selective and arbitrary manner. Sri Lanka’s Comments have attempted to address some of the errors and misperceptions contained in the Report.

The references made in the Council welcoming the High Commissioner’s Report on Sri Lanka, even at the highest level of the UN are regrettable particularly considering that it is based on questionable and baseless material including what has been processed outside the UN framework. The Council may recall in this regard that the Panel of Experts Report which was the culmination of a private consultation that the Secretary General sought for his own advice, and is not the product of any intergovernmental process, has been extensively resorted to by the High Commissioner in her Report to the Council, in a bid to legitimise it within the UN framework despite the lack of mandate in this regard.

It is universally accepted that the High Commissioner and the OHCHR must remain transparent, objective and be guided solely by the mandate given by the UN. However, if the initiatives taken on Sri Lanka at this juncture by the OHCHR is to be the basis on which the country is to be judged, it will clearly be a travesty of justice.

It is in this context that we greatly value the sentiments expressed in the Council by countries which have similar experiences with regard to reconciliation, that Sri Lanka be provided with the requisite time and space to address their own process domestically in a comprehensive manner as opposed to those who continue to pay disproportionate attention to Sri Lanka, based on agendas driven by political motives.

The Government of Sri Lanka therefore reiterates its rejection of resolution 22/1, as well as the High Commissioner’s Report in its entirety which are fundamentally flawed. These initiatives disregard the substantial progress made by the Government during the five years which have elapsed since the end of the thirty year war against terrorism. They also pay scant regard to the complexities and local nuances of a sensitive reconciliation process, while eroding confidence of the people of Sri Lanka by the constant changing of unjustifiable demands. Moreover, they persist in an attitude which is clearly disproportionate to the circumstances and inconsistent with the treatment of comparable situations. It is much to be regretted that the High Commissioner’s Report and those who exalt its virtues only seek to inflict harm on the reconciliation process by bringing about a polarisation of the Sri Lankan society.

In conclusion, Mr. President, Sri Lanka reiterates its continued cooperation and engagement with the work of the Council.

Thank You.

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized