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
?????????????????????????????????????????????????Monday, September 3, 2018
- Sunday, September 02, 2018
The progress of ongoing criminal investigations into the grisly killing
of several Tamil youths following a racket of abduction for ransom,
spearheaded ‘allegedly’ (here, I use the term quite deliberately) by a
Naval officer and others during 2008-2009 will be the crucible on which
this Government and this Presidency’s commitment to promises made, will
be tested most severely.
Fair differences between then and now
Unlike other instances of the killing of youths, such as what occurred
in Trincomalee in 2006, ready excuses cannot be offered as to the chain
of evidence becoming cold or pointing to key witnesses living overseas
being reluctant to return to testify, as would be naturally the case
given the trauma that they have had to undergo.
It must be fairly acknowledged that one distinguishing feature of the
current ‘yahapalanaya’ administration is that the Navy suspect was
arrested and produced before court which would have been out of the
question if the Rajapaksas were still in power. Then again, the fact
that the Court inquiring into the matter had proceeded to act according
to law is also another demonstrable difference when compared to the
past. These officers of the state must be commended to the highest
extent possible for carrying out their functions with due diligence
despite the enormous and impossible strains put on them by political
forces.
However and despite these undoubtedly positive developments, the key
question here is whether the chain of impunity at the highest levels
will be broken and those responsible for enabling these acts to take
place and persistently protecting the perpetrators will be held
accountable to law. For ultimately, systemic impunity is the core issue,
not really the arrest, questioning or even punishment of minions who
will doubtless be replaced by other minions in the correct political
circumstances, perpetuating these crimes from which we have suffered as a
nation for decades. Indeed, the arrogance with which the suspect in
this ongoing case smiled and strutted while in handcuffs testifies to
this web of impunity.
Central issue of tackling the chain of command
Sri Lanka is no stranger to the killing of children. The periodic
uncovering of graves with the skeletal remains of massacred children
decades ago or nearer in time, is just one manifestation. From the
killing of child monks in Aranthalawa in 1987 by the Liberation Tigers
of Tamil Eelam to the children caught up in reprisal attacks by armed
forces stationed in the North and East at the height of the conflict and
including the vast numbers of children killed in the South during the
second insurrection of the Janatha Vimukthi Peramuna, this earth should
weep blood for the countless innocents mowed down in the course of
grievous sins committed by ambitious men.
This week marks the International Day of Disappearances as the month
comes to an end. These are reflections that are therefore opportune in
this context. ‘Disappearances’ and extra-judicial killings mark the
lowest ebb of a nation’s functioning. As long as these crimes remain
unpunished, from the highest levels of those who ‘protected’ or enabled
such atrocities whether in the military chain of command or in the state
prosecutor’s office to those carrying out the acts, only nonsense can
be spoken of reconciliation. Put simply, families of those who have had
their members disappeared or killed, will not be satisfied by money
payments handed out to them or by a state official blandly informing
them that a crime has occurred. This, they already know. What they seek
is formal state acknowledgement of these acts at the minimum and as a
necessary corollary, the chain of impunity to be broken.
Our constitutional jurisprudence has consistently stressed the principle
that superior officers exercising responsibility over subordinates who
commit rights violations, will themselves be held responsible. There
are, of course, some notable and puzzling exceptions to this rule as was
evidenced in the Embilipitiya Case where the commanding officer of the
camp where Sinhalese school children had been detained and ‘disappeared’
during the eighties in the deep South, due to a personal vendetta of
individuals was not held liable in law.
In the Supreme Court, he was given the right to be promoted to the rank
of Major General on the basis that he had been acquitted in the criminal
courts on the basis that he could not directly be responsible for the
enforced disappearance of the children at the army camp. The lenient
position taken by the Supreme Court at the time belied constitutional
considerations and the protection of rights Parents of the victims had,
in fact, testified that they had brought their appeals to this
commanding officer in order to find out what had happened to their
children but that he had done nothing.
The law must take its course
Certainly these were not precedents that afforded reassurance that the
Rule of Law was being upheld with fear and favour to none. Writing for
the International Commission of Jurists in 2010, I pointed to the fact
that the refusal on the part of Sri Lanka’s highest court even when the
Bench was otherwise proactively responding to violations of fundamental
rights, was a major failing (Still Seeking Justice, ICJ).
But despite some aberrant decisions in the exercise of its
constitutional jurisdiction, the Court has upheld the principle is that a
superior officer protecting a subordinate who engages in atrocities or
‘acquiescing’ in that act, will be held responsible. As a matter of law
therefore and applying these principles to the ongoing case of the Navy
abductions, those who chirrup airily that officers implicated at the
highest levels of Sri Lanka’s military hierarchy ‘only’ helped the
suspect, must acquaint themselves with the fact that this, as assessed
by authoritative local precedents and notably under international law,
cannot absolve the individual of legal responsibility, under the
criminal law and certainly in terms of constitutional protections.
What remains is for the law to take its course. Political interference
in that process will only be the last nail in the ‘yahapalanaya’ coffin.
That much must be categorically said. These killings of children were
at the heart of a ransom racket and had pure and common greed behind
them. They speak to a particular horror that stands in a category all of
its own.
It is a nightmarish and devilish blemish on this nation’s memory and must be exorcised with maximum force.


