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
?????????????????????????????????????????????????Saturday, March 30, 2013
Lessons Are Learnt: Only By Self-Examination
I
don’t want words to sever me from reality.
I
don’t want to need them. I want nothing
to
reveal feeling but feeling—as in freedom,
or
the knowledge of peace in a realm beyond,
or
the sound of water poured into a bowl.
from
Henri Cole’s ‘Gravity and Center’ (2009)
It
was almost an year to the date after the LTTE
supremo was killed and his organisation decisively defeated
that President issued
a Warrant appointing the Commission of Inquiry on Lessons Learnt
and Reconciliation. In its preamble, the Presidential Warrant stated,
inter alia, ‘it has become necessary that while we as an independent and proud
nation of multi-ethnic polity undertake a journey of common goals in a spirit of
co-operation and partnership, we also learn from this recent history lessons
that would ensure that there will be no recurrence of any internecine conflict
in the future’. In the mandate to the Commission, the Warrant required the
Commission to recommend ‘the institutional, administrative and legislative
measures that will need to be taken in order to prevent any recurrence of such
concerns in the future, and to promote further national unity and reconciliation
among all communities, and to make any such other recommendations with reference
to any of the matters that have been inquired into under the terms of this
Warranr’. The Commission commenced public hearings three months later. In
September 2010, it submitted some interim recommendations and its final report
in November 2011.
Powerful
sections of the Government seem to be actively encouraging the activities of
these new extremist groups, the Bodhu Bala Sena in particular.
When
the LLRC was first appointed, there were many cynics who dismissed it as a mere
face-saving device by the President to show that he was interested in
investigating human rights concerns raised by various parties in the conduct of
the war, particularly in its closing stages. Many, including some international
NGOs declined to give evidence before the LLRC, presumably either because they
considered it a waste of time and effort to present evidence before a Commission
whose findings they considered were already pre-determined or because they did
not want to give legitimacy to a Commission that would merely repeat the
government line. In the end, these cynics were proved wrong. The LLRC gave a
fairly independent analysis and observations. The Commissioners presented some
remarkably discerning and perceptive recommendations, which if implemented in
the same spirit would have gone a long way towards achieving the objectives of
the LLRC, so that all Sri Lankans could undertake a journey of common goals
towards national unity and reconciliation in a spirit of co-operation,
partnership and friendship. The Commissioners not only proved the cynics wrong,
they also did the country proud. One cannot single out any one or the other of
the Commissioners as being primarily responsible for this. Those who attended
the sittings of the LLRC would have noticed that the Chairman C R de Silva,
former Attorney General was in the centre. On his right was former diplomat H M
G S Palihakkara and on his left was seated the former Foreign Ministry official
Rohan Perera. But there was not a single dissentient voice among them. So we
salute all the Commissioners as being jointly and severally responsible for a
fine report and a set of recommendations written and presented under challenging
conditions.
Implementing
LLRC Recommendations
There
have been earlier Commissions and Committees appointed and which reportedly made
some reasonable recommendations. One was the All Party Committee headed
by Tissa
Vitarana to work out a political formala for the National Question.
The other was the Commission of Inquiry headed by retired Supreme Court Judge
Nissanka Udalagama which inquired into the killing of five students at
Trincomalee, the killing of seventeen aid workers in Mutur and several other
serious incidents of killings of civilians, security services personnel, etc.
That Commission had to abruptly end their public hearings before they could
conclude all the inquiries when their warrant was not extended. But both the
Tissa Vitarana Committee and the Nissanka Udalagama Commission presented their
reports to the President. But neither report has been released to the public and
presumably is gathering dust in the Presidential Secretariat. It has not been
released because it is rumoured that their recommendations are at variance with
the government’s stance on the matters inquired into. But the LLRC Report has
become too high profile for it not to be shelved. Still there has been tardiness
in releasing it in all three languages. The public is however grateful to the
Centre for Policy Alternatives for their public spiritedness, despite their
initial scepticism about the LLRC, for publishing and making available to the
general public, the recommendations of the LLRC in all three languages.
Government
spokespersons have repeatedly claimed, at various fora including the United Nations
Human Rights Council, that the Government is committed to
implementing the LLRC recommendations. But a rider is added to this statement.
Recommendations it is claimed cannot be implemented overnight. They require time
and the government is working out the modus operandi for implementing them. The
hollowness of this claim is seen even by a cursory examination of some of the
recommendations and the manner in which they have been ignored.
Certainly,
some of the land issues raised in the LLRC recommendations will take to be
implemented though we are not sure if any attempt has been made to address them.
But there are many recommendations which can be implemented immediately but is
seemingly been deliberately ignored. One of these was that the Police should be
de-linked from the Ministry of Defence. They were of the opinion that we should
revert to the system that prevailed under the 17th Amendment where a a strong
and ‘independent’ National Police Commission.
LLRC
on Inter Religious Tensions
The
importance of this recommendation becomes clear when we refer to another comment
and recommendation made by the LLRC in respect of inter-religious tensions. This
was long before new extremist religious groups began their hate campaign
directed particularly at the Muslim community. The Commission had in their
report stated: ‘The Commission was deeply concerned to hear of several recent
incidents where places of worship have been vandalized by unknown mobs. The
continuation of these incidents would certainly be inimical to the
reconciliation process. Strong deterrent action should be taken to prevent such
incidents. The Commission notes with regret that law enforcement agencies have
hitherto failed to investigate and prosecute persons responsible for such
unlawful action. The Government should make every endeavour to arrest the
occurrence of such incidents. Such action would instill a sense of security and
confidence among the affected groups.’ This statement has greater relevancy now
than then. And the Government’s unwillingness to implement this key
recommendation of the LLRC can only be construed as deliberate.
Powerful
sections of the Government seem to be actively encouraging the activities of
these new extremist groups, the Bodhu
Bala Sena in particular. This group’s latest target appears to be
Ferial Ashraff, the mild mannered Sri Lanka’s High Commissioner in Singapore.
Their grouse is that she had rejected a suggestion to call the forthcoming New
Year as Sinhala New Year. She had very correctly said that Sri Lanka had always
been referring to it as Sinhala and Tamil New Year. She had even suggested,
despite being a Muslim for whom this New Year has no religious significance,
that it be referred to as the National New Year. But such national sentiments
seem anathema to the Bodhu Bala Sena and their fellow chauvinists probably in
the High Commission in Singapore. The people of Singapore will be appalled if
they were to hear that there was a demand here to recall our High Commissioner
for the reasons adduced by this extremist group. It may interest the Bodhu Bala
Sena and its fellow travelers to know that Singapore, a smaller island than Sri
Lanka, is also a multi-ethnic and multi-religious society. The Chinese form
nearly 75% of the population; yet it has four official languages; its national
anthem Majulah Singapura is in the Malay language, the language of a minority
community. It was an old Malay patriotic song that was adopted as the national
anthem at independence. No wonder there is ethnic and religious harmony in that
country. There will be no room for chauvinist groups like the Bodhu Bala Sena to
exist in Singapore. It is also a recommendation of our LLRC that we revert to
singing our national anthem in both Sinhala and Tamil, a tradition that was
stopped by the Rajapakse Government a few years ago. The Army ensures that Tamil
children in the North sing the national anthem only in Sinhala. the LLRC
recommendation is another promoting reconciliation that could have been
implemented immediately, if there was a political will.
UNHCR
Resolution on Sri Lanka
Unfortunately,
our political leadership seems to prefer promoting narrow domestic political
agendas rather than allowing Sri Lanka and Sri Lankans to enter into and
participate fully as equals in the nation’s affairs. The government
spokespersons continue to refer to the recent UNHCR resolution as being against
Sri Lanka. Various people are being encouraged to abuse all countries that voted
for this particular resolution. Obviously, very few have read the text of the
resolution that was passed. There has been little effort, including by the
mainstream media, to educate the public about the content of the resolution. The
preamble to the resolution acknowledges that the progress made by the Government
of Sri Lanka in rebuilding infrastructure, demining, and resettling the majority
of internally displaced persons, but notes nonetheless that considerable work
lies ahead in the areas of justice, reconciliation and the resumption of
livelihoods, and stressing the importance of the full participation of local
populations, including representatives of civil society and minorities, in these
efforts. It further notes the report of the Lessons Learnt and Reconciliation
Commission of Sri Lanka and its findings and recommendations, and acknowledging
its possible contribution to the process of national reconciliation in Sri
Lanka; it also notes the national plan of action to implement the
recommendations of the Lessons Learnt and Reconciliation Commission of the
Government of Sri Lanka and its commitments as set forth in response to the
findings and recommendations of the Commission, but regrets that the national
plan of action does not adequately address all of the findings and constructive
recommendations of the Commission; it also expresses concern at the continuing
reports of violations of human rights in Sri Lanka, includingenforced
disappearances, extrajudicial
killings, torture and
violations of the rights to freedom of expression, association and peaceful
assembly, as well as intimidation of and reprisals against human rights
defenders, members of civil society and journalists, threats to judicial
independence and the rule of law, and discrimination on the basis of religion or
belief.
The
main body of the resolution reiterates the call made earlier to implement
effectively the constructive recommendations made in the report of the Lessons
Learnt and Reconciliation Commission, and to take all necessary additional steps
to fulfil its relevant legal obligations and commitment to initiate credible and
independent actions to ensure justice, equity, accountability and reconciliation
for all Sri Lankans; it also encourages the Government of Sri Lanka to implement
the recommendations made in the report of the Office of the High Commissioner,
and also calls upon the Government to conduct an independent and credible
investigation into allegations of violations of international human rights law
and international humanitarian law, as applicable.
We
would term this resolution as being pro-Sri Lanka, reminding the government of
its stated commitment to implement the LLRC recommendations and its obligations
to the people of Sri Lanka. to ensure those fundamental rights which all member
states of the United Nations are pledged to uphold. These are recommendations
which are own Commission of Inquiry on Lessons Learnt and Reconciliation have
made. If we are to achieve any sort of reconciliation in our country, there is a
need for genuine self-reflection and self-examination and to implement the LLRC
recommendations. Only then can we hold our heads high in the international
comity of nations. Only then can all our people experience the feeling of
freedom and the knowledge of peace.