A Brief Colonial History Of Ceylon(SriLanka)
Sri Lanka: One Island Two Nations
A Brief Colonial History Of Ceylon(SriLanka)
Sri Lanka: One Island Two Nations
(Full Story)
Search This Blog
Back to 500BC.
==========================
Thiranjala Weerasinghe sj.- One Island Two Nations
?????????????????????????????????????????????????Wednesday, June 14, 2017
Reconciliation in Sri Lanka requires actions not only processes
Eight years after the end of the war the consolidation of peace and
restoration of normalcy in Sri Lanka is generally taken for granted.
This is also the perception of the general population outside of the
North and East where most of the war, and its associated destruction,
took place. On the other hand, in the North and East, there is a strong
sense of continuity with the past. This is on account of continuing
grievances with regard to the fate of missing persons and return of land
that remains under the military. These unresolved issues rankle and
generate new rounds of resentment. The continuing discontent in the
North and East is however not in the forefront of popular consciousness
in the rest of the country. The issues that loom large there are
different.
The failure of the government to distribute the economic benefits of
peace to the population in general poses a major political challenge.
The anticipated flood of foreign investment has not materialized. In
these circumstances it is not surprising that the new Foreign Minister
Ravi Karunanayake should emphasise the importance of focusing attention
on the economic aspects of international relations. As the former
Finance Minister prior to the Cabinet reshuffle he would have greater
familiarity with the economic aspects of international relations rather
than on issues of transitional justice and human rights that preoccupied
his immediate predecessor. Former Foreign Minister, Mangala
Samaraweera, was able to extricate the country from the antagonistic
relations it had with sectors of the international community.
In particular the Western countries which tend to give importance to
issues of human rights and governance in their dealings with other
countries have been won round to be fully supportive of the government.
It is important that at the present time the government should continue
to give priority to issues of human rights and governance. The
international community continues to give attention to the government’s
implementation of its commitments with regard to dealing with the past
through transitional justice measures and in preparing for the future
through legal and political reform. These commitments are not only ones
made by the present government. The commitments to the international
community go back to 2009 around the time the war ended and President
Mahinda Rajapaksa led the government.
JOINT STATEMENT
The Joint Statement by United Nations Secretary-General Ban Ki-Moon and
the Sri Lanka government at the conclusion of UN Secretary-General’s
visit to Sri Lanka on 23 May 2009 stated that the visit was an outcome
of an invitation by President Rajapaksa to the UN Secretary-General. In
the Joint Statement it was also agreed that following the end of
operations against the LTTE, Sri Lanka had entered a new post-conflict
beginning. President Rajapaksa and the Secretary-General agreed that
addressing the aspirations and grievances of all communities and working
towards a lasting political solution was fundamental to ensuring
long-term socio-economic development.
The UN Secretary-General welcomed the assurance of the President of Sri
Lanka contained in his statement in Parliament on 19 May 2009 that a
national solution acceptable to all sections of people will be evolved.
President Rajapaksa expressed his resolve to proceed with the
implementation of the 13th Amendment, as well as to begin a broader
dialogue with all parties, including the Tamil parties in the new
circumstances, to further enhance this process and to bring about
lasting peace and development in Sri Lanka.
In addition, the government reiterated its commitment to the promotion
and protection of human rights, in keeping with international human
rights standards and Sri Lanka’s international obligations. The UN
Secretary-General underlined the importance of an accountability process
for addressing violations of international humanitarian and human
rights law and it was jointly noted that the government would take
measures to address those grievances. Those who seek to blame the
present government for putting reconciliation, transitional justice and
accountability into the middle of its foreign policy are not taking into
account the actual record.
LOCAL IMPLEMENTATION
It is also significant that for nearly five years, up until March 2014
the international community took the position that it was up to Sri
Lanka to design its own plan to deal with human rights and
accountability issues that accompanied the past. The international
community did not require that Sri Lanka should have a hybrid mechanism
in which there needed to be international members. The international
community was satisfied with the report of the Lessons Learnt and
Reconciliation Commission, which was a purely national undertaking with
no foreign component. It was the failure of the former government headed
by President Rajapaksa to take its commitments seriously, such as by
implementing the LLRC report, that led to the debacle of March 2014.
In March 2014, five years after the end of the war, the UN Human Rights
Council brought into focus the issue of direct foreign intervention in
Sri Lankan affairs. It called on the UN Human Rights Commissioner to
monitor the human rights situation in Sri Lanka and to continue to
assess progress on relevant national processes. It also urged the UN
High Commissioner to undertake a comprehensive investigation into
alleged serious violations and abuses of human rights by both parties in
Sri Lanka and to establish the facts and circumstances of such alleged
violations and of the crimes perpetrated with a view to avoiding
impunity and ensuring accountability.
However, due to the present government’s willingness to engage
constructively with the international community the relationship has got
transformed. The positive results of the government’s policy shift was
seen in March this year when the international community in Geneva gave
the government a further two years to implement its commitments made in
terms of the UNHRC resolution of October 2015. It was seen once again in
the restoration of the GSP Plus tariff privilege to Sri Lanka by the
EU. These are still based to a degree on promises and words of the
government rather than on concrete actions on the ground. The bridge
building and confidence building with the international community needs
to continue.
PRESENT PRIORITIES
In this context it will be necessary for the government to address the
need on the part of the international community to see words turned into
deeds. The government’s renewed attention to constitutional reform must
be shown to be a genuine effort to address the core issue, which is to
provide a framework for a lasting political solution to the ethnic
conflict. The renewed debate on the issue of the unitary state is an
indication that the government is serious about addressing the political
root of the ethnic conflict.
The government is also sending out positive messages to civil society
once again about its willingness to engage with it to find solutions
that meet international standards. The Universal Periodic Review (UPR)
undertaken by the UN is one in which governments are obliged to engage
in consultations with civil society. The UPR is a relatively new process
which commenced in 2006 in which the human rights records of all 193 UN
Member States is reviewed periodically. Under this process, the human
rights situation of all member countries of the UN is reviewed every 4- 5
years. Sri Lanka has been reviewed twice under the UPR, in 2008 and
2012 respectively.
Sri Lanka’s third UPR review is scheduled for November 2017 and the
national report in this regard has to be submitted to the UN Human
Rights Council in Geneva in August 2017. The Ministry of Foreign
Affairs, in consultation with other government departments has prepared a
draft national report and wishes to invite views and observations of
interested individuals and civil society organizations on the draft.
This is unlike past practice in which the government showed little or no
interest in consulting civil society or in being transparent in what
they did. It is a positive sign that the cabinet reshuffle has not
changed the positive break with the past. But it is necessary that the
willingness to consult and to speak in terms of international standards
are reflected in actual changes on the ground.