Peace for the World World ! Your War Our Lives
The Dalai Lama
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)
Back to 500BC.
Sunday, April 30, 2017
“காணிகளை உரிமையாளர்களுக்கு வழங்கவேண்டியது அவசியம் முடியாவிடின் ஏற்றுக்கொள்ளத்தக்க நட்டஈடு வழங்கப்படவேண்டும்“
by Priyatharshan on 2017
பாதிக்கப்பட்ட மக்களின் காணிகளின் உரிமை தொடர்பான செயற்பாடுகள்
அடையாளம் காணப்பட வேண்டும். அதன் பின்னர் அந்தக் காணிகள்
உரிமையாளர்களுக்கு வழங்கப்பட வேண்டியது அவசியம். அவ்வாறு
காணிகளை மீள வழங்க முடியாவிடின் காணி உரிமையாளர்களுக்கு நட்டஈடு
வழங்கப்பட வேண்டும். இதுவே ஐக்கிய நாடுகள் சபையின் நிலைப்பாடாகும்
என்று ஐக்கிய நாடுகள் சபையின் இலங்கைக்கான வதிவிடப் பிரதிநிதி
உனாமெக்குலே தெரிவித்தார்.
நல்லிணக்க செயற்பாடுகளை அடையாளம் காணும் விடயத்தில் இலங்கை
அரசாங்கத்துடன் ஐக்கிய நாடுகள் சபை செயற்பட்டு வருகிறது.
அந்தவகையில் நல்லிணக்க செயற்பாடுகளில் காணிகளை விடுவிக்கும்
காரணியானது மிகவும் முக்கியமான ஒன்றாகும். அதாவது சமூகங்களுக்கு
மத்தியில் நம்பிக்கையை கட்டியெழுப்புவதில் இந்தக் காரணி முக்கிய
பங்காற்றும் என்றும் ஐ.நா. வின் இலங்கைக்கான வதிவிடப் பிரதிநிதி
உனாமெக்குலே சுட்டிக்காட்டினார்.
வடக்கு மாகாணத்தில் காணிகளை இழந்த மக்கள் அவற்றை மீள பெற்றுக்
கொடுக்குமாறு வலியுறுத்தி தொடர் போராட்டங்களை நடத்தி வருகின்றமை
தொடர்பில் ஐக்கிய நாடுகளின் இலங்கைக்கான வதிவிடப் பிரதிநிதி
உனாமெக்குலேயிடம் பிரத்தியேகமாக கேசரி வினவியபோதே அவர்
மேற்கண்டவாறு குறிப்பிட்டார்.
ஐ.நா.வின் வதிவிடப் பிரதிநிதி உனாமெக்குலே இந்த விடயம் தொடர்பில் மேலும் குறிப்பிடுகையில்,
எந்தவொரு சமூகத்திலும் ஆர்ப்பாட்டம் நடத்துவதற்கான உரிமை
உறுதிப்படுத்தப்பட வேண்டும் என்பதே எனது கருத்தாகும். இலங்கையைப்
பொறுத்தவரையில் காணிப் பிரச்சினையானது ஒரு பாரிய விவகாரமாக
காணப்படுகிறது. இது நீண்டகாலப் பிரச்சினையாக இருக்கின்றது.
காணிகளின் உண்மையான உரிமையாளர்கள் அவை எப்போது தமக்கு கிடைக்கும்
என்பதை தெரிந்து கொள்வதற்கான உரிமையை கொண்டுள்ளனர்.
இந்த காணி விவகாரம் தொடர்பில் கலந்துரையாடல்கள் இடம்பெறுவதாக
நாங்கள் நினைக்கின்றோம். இந்த வாரம்கூட ஒரு கலந்துரையாடல்
இடம்பெற்றதாக அறிந்தோம். அந்த கலந்துரையாடல்களின் முடிவுகள்
அல்லது விளைவுகள் என்னவென்பதை அறிந்து கொள்ள நாங்கள் ஆவலாக
இருக்கின்றோம்.
கேள்வி பொது மக்களின் காணிகளை விடுவிக்குமாறு ஐக்கிய நாடுகள் சபை அரசாங்கத்திற்கு அழுத்தம் பிரயோகிக்குமா?
பதில் ஐக்கிய நாடுகள் சபை இலங்கை அரசாங்கத்துடன் பணியாற்றி
வருகிறது. அதாவது நல்லிணக்க செயற்பாடுகளை அடையாளம் காணும்
விடயத்தில் இலங்கை அரசாங்கத்துடன் ஐக்கிய நாடுகள் சபை செயற்பட்டு
வருகிறது. நல்லிணக்க செயற்பாடுகளில் காணிகளை விடுவிக்கும்
காரணியானது மிகவும் முக்கியமான ஒன்றாகும். அதாவது சமூகங்களுக்கு
மத்தியில் நம்பிக்கையை கட்டியெழுப்புவதில் இது முக்கிய
பங்காற்றும் காரணியாகும்.
காணிகள் விடுவிக்கப்பட்டதும் நாங்கள் உள்ளூராட்சி மன்றங்களுடன்
இணைந்து செயற்பட்டு மக்களுக்கான தேவைகளை பூர்த்தி செய்ய நடவடிக்கை
எடுப்போம். அந்த மக்களின் வாழ்க்கையை இயல்பு நிலைக்கு
கொண்டுவருவதற்காக அரசாங்கத்துடன் இணைந்து செயற்படுவோம்.
காணிகளின் உரிமை தொடர்பான செயற்பாடுகள் அடையாளம் காணப்பட வேண்டும்.
அதன் பின்னர் காணிகள் உரிமையாளர்களுக்கு வழங்கப்பட வேண்டியது
அவசியம். அல்லது காணி உரிமையாளர்களுக்கு நட்டஈடு வழங்கப்பட
வேண்டும்.
கேள்வி ஆனால் போராட்டம் நடத்தும் பாதிக்கப்பட்ட மக்கள் தங்களுக்கு
நட்டஈடு வேண்டாம் என்றும் தமது காணிகளே வழங்கப்பட வேண்டும் என்றும்
கூறி வருகின்றனர். இதனை ஐக்கிய நாடுகள் சபை எவ்வாறு பார்க்கிறது?
பதில் மக்களின் பக்கம் இருந்து பார்க்கும்போது அந்த தர்க்கத்தில் நியாயம்
இருப்பதை நாங்கள் ஏற்றுக் கொள்கிறோம். அதில் ஒரு பொருள் உள்ளது. ஆனால்
உலகில் எந்த அரசாங்கமாக இருந்தாலும் காணிகள் அரச தேவைக்காக பெறப்பட்டால்
அவற்றுக்கு நட்டஈடு வழங்கலாம் என்பதும் பெறுமதியானதொரு தர்க்கமாகும்
என்றார்.
Sri Lanka’s Crumbling Credibility
By Kumarathasan Rasingam –April 29, 2017
Kumarathasan Rasingam
The credibility of Sri Lanka in relation to the settlement of the 60
year old ethnic problem of Tamils can be judged from the fate of several
pacts, agreements and undertakings which were made from 1956 to 2009
and the Sri Lankan Governments unwillingness to comply with the
implementation of its own undertakings:- LLRC [Lessons Learnt and
Reconciliation Commission] recommendations: The August 1 2015 UNHRC
Resolution 30/1 and its delaying tactics in implementing the recent
similar Resolution in March 2017.
This article tries to detail the failing credibility of Sri Lanka since
then particularly after the Human Rights Resolution on October 1st 2015.
This was a resolution adopted with the blessings of United Nations
Human Rights Council and sponsored by USA with Sri Lanka being a
co-sponsor. By co-sponsoring the resolution Sri Lanka unequivocally and
fully committed itself to implement all the recommendations mentioned in
the Resolution. Sri Lankan Prime Minister Ranil Wickremasinghe defended
the Resolution and even vigorously justified the “establishment of a
Sri Lankan Judicial Mechanism including the Special Counsel’s Office of
Commonwealth and other foreign judges, defence lawyers and authorised
prosecutors and investigators.”
These recommendations can be described as the corner stone of this
resolution aimed to fulfill the targeted commitments of “accountability,
justice and reconciliation”. Earlier Sri Lanka successfully killed the
proposal mooted by the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights who
recommended a “Hybrid court integrating foreign judges etc” and get the
international mechanism with foreign jurist’s participation.
Having fully committed to implement this Resolution Prime Minister
Wickremesinghe and President Sirisena defended all the recommendations
and PM Ranil even stated that there have been instances where foreign
lawyers have participated and contributed their skills and knowledge in
the legal proceedings in Sri Lanka like the appearance of Mr. Quass, QC
in the former Prime Minister Bandaranaike assassination case in 1960.
There were instances when eminent Sri Lankan lawyers have served as
judges in foreign countries particularly in Africa. It is to be stated
that the Sri Lankan constitution does not in any of its section prohibit
the participation of any foreign judges. What is not prohibited can be
allowed provided the modalities of appointments are followed involving
the President and/or Judicial Service Commission as required.
It is relevant to quote the confusing and conflicting statements made by
Government Ministers including the Prime Minister and the President in
relation to the judicial mechanism and investigation.
On January 11th 2015: Rajitha Senevaratne – The
Government Spokesperson stated: “That Sri Lanka’s new Government will
not hand over anyone to an international inquiry investigating
allegation of war crimes”.
On February rd3, 2015: Foreign Minister Mangala Samaraweera- In
an interview to ‘Swarajya’ said “We hope to have technical assistance
from United Nations even perhaps judges from Commonwealth”.
On June 7th 2015: Justice Minister Wijeyadasa Rajapakshe – Vowed to set up a credible domestic mechanism.
On August 24th 2015: Prime Minister Ranil Wickremesinghe – In
an interview with Hindu stated that “There is no legal basis for
international investigation within Sri Lanka adding that any
accountability mechanism has to be domestic in nature.”
On January 29th 2016: President Sirisena – In an
interview with Al-Jazeera stated that “We definitely do not need
outsiders. He also insisted that Sri Lanka was not being investigated
for war crimes, but rather allegations of human rights”.
On January 31st: Prime Minister Ranil Wickremesinghe said:
If we are to permit foreign judges to sit in judgement then our
constitution has to be amended with the consent of the people at a
referendum” [News Radio US]
On February 20th 2016: Prime Minister Ranil Wickremesinghe – While
in India at Guruvayur stated that “We may not have the full expertise
to identify the exact factors that led to the casualties, so
international participation is welcome for determining such cases”.
On February 2016: foreign Minister Mangala Samaraweera – In
an event at US Institute of Peace in Washington said that “The previous
statements of the Prime Minister Ranil and the President Sirisena was
their opinion and the final decision would be taken after wide
consultation with all stake holders”
On July 8th 2016: President Sirisena – Stated that “As
long as I am the President; I will not allow foreigners or organizations
to interfere in the internal affairs”. [Ceylon News]
On July 15th 2016: General Sarath Fonseka – said that
“Government had agreed to allow foreign monitors and obtain
international technical assistance and the government was not in favour
of including foreign judges”. [Daily Mirror]
On January 6th 2017: Minister of Justice – said that
“He had no confidence in the Consultation Task Force [CTF] which called
for a judicial mechanism with foreign involvement”. [Daily Mirror]
On January 7th 2017: State Minister Laxman Yapa – said “Only logistical and technical assistance would be obtained.” [Daily Mirror]
President Sirisena commenting on Consultation Task Force [CTF] expressed
his disapproval of most of its recommendations including hybrid court
and independent investigations into war Crimes.
Sri Lanka makes a mockery of the UN Human Rights Council
The session was important for Sri
Lanka's coalition government, led by President Maithripala Sirisena and
Prime Minister Ranil Wickremesinghe. (AP Photo/Tran Van Minh)
by Taylor Dibbert | 
The UN Human Rights Council's 34th
session ended on March 24. Ostensibly, the session was an important
moment for Sri Lanka's coalition government, which is led by President
Maithripala Sirisena and Prime Minister Ranil Wickremesinghe. Sri
Lanka's compliance with a previously passed Council resolution (designed
to promote human rights and transitional justice) came under review.
Foreign Minister Mangala Samaraweera addressed the body on Feb. 28 and the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, Zeid Ra'ad Al Hussein, provided a critical assessment of the government's performance during the session. On March 23, as expected, another cosponsored resolution was passed on Sri Lanka.
But here's the bottom line: The passage of another resolution on Sri
Lanka, the fifth since 2012, should be viewed as a stark reminder – of
both the limits of international influence via the Council and that now
would be an opportune time for international actors to consider other
methods of engagement with the Sri Lankan government.
Colombo's wide-ranging reform agenda has been stagnating for some time. Nowhere is this truer than when it comes to transitional justice,
and building a lasting peace in a country that went through a brutal
civil war – fought between Sri Lankan military forces and the separatist
Tamil Tigers – from 1983 to 2009.
In a major upset, Sirisena defeated Mahinda Rajapaksa in a January 2015
election. Rajapaksa is still venerated by many ethnic Sinhalese, the
majority community, for winning the war. Nonetheless, he put the country
on an increasingly authoritarian, corrupt and nepotistic course, which
led to his electoral demise.
With the resolution it cosponsored in October 2015,
Colombo committed to an expansive transitional justice agenda,
including four important mechanisms: a truth commission, a judicial
mechanism to deal with alleged wartime abuses and
offices to handle both disappearances and reparations. Yet none of
those mechanisms are operational. Besides, there are plenty of other
moves the government could have already made to prove its sincerity
about transitional justice.
Sustained militarization – the military is almost exclusively Sinhalese –
throughout the Tamil-dominated northern and eastern provinces remains a
major issue. Relatedly, the military's continued occupation of civilian
land is a big problem too. Security sector reform is an important
matter that's being ignored. Based on my recent exchange with a
Colombo-based human rights lawyer, fifty to seventy Tamil political prisoners are still being held in various detention centers throughout the country.
The government should immediately release all of these individuals or at least bring them to trial.
More generally, Colombo has taken an intransigent approach towards
international involvement in the transitional justice process, although a
degree of international participation is essential to ensure that the
process is credible. Furthermore, the country's political leadership,
including the president and the prime minister, are still not making an
articulate case for these reforms.
Transitional justice is in deep trouble and additional scrutiny via the
Geneva-based body is unlikely to change that very much. From 2012 to
2014, Rajapaksa categorically rejected three resolutions on Sri Lanka.
The Sirisena administration has spent nearly two years basically
ignoring a resolution it had cosponsored. For better or worse, the U.S.
played an important role in the passage of all five resolutions.
Sri Lanka is making a mockery of the Council. If international actors
actually want to keep the pressure on the island nation, they should
consider moving beyond nonbinding human-rights resolutions – perhaps by
reexamining engagement (diplomatic, military, even economic) at the
bilateral level – an admittedly unlikely scenario at present.
For the victims of Sri Lanka's war, particularly those residing in the
country's war-torn north and east, Sirisena's ascendance has not
resulted in dramatic changes to daily life. And, for the duration of his
tenure, that's probably not going to change. These are inconvenient
realities for many, not least because foreign money for transitional
justice projects keeps pouring into the country.
Taylor Dibbert, a writer based in the Washington, D.C. area, is
affiliated with the Pacific Forum at the Center for Strategic and
International Studies. The views expressed here are his own. Follow him
on Twitter: @taylordibbert.
If you would like to write an op-ed for the Washington Examiner, please read our guidelines on submissions.
Sri Lankan Tamil, Muslim political parties protest against the military
Sri
Lanka’s Tamil and Muslim political parties are demanding release of
land occupied by the military, justice to the missing and jobs for those
affected by the civil war
Sri
Lanka’s civil war (1983-2009), between the state and the LTTE, created
thousands of refugees and led to some 65,000 disappearances. Photo:
David Gray/AFP
Thu, Apr 27 2017.
Colombo: All the major towns in Sri Lanka’s war-ravaged northern
and eastern provinces on Thursday observed a shutdown after the Tamil
and Muslim political parties held a protest demanding the release of
military-occupied land. Offices, businesses, schools and public
transport came to a halt after the two provinces observed a shutdown.
“We hope the government would respond after looking at this protest
action. All Tamil and Muslim political parties in these areas are
observing the protest,” M.K. Shivajilingam, a hardline Tamil provincial
councillor from the Tamil-dominated northern province, said. In some
Muslim-dominated areas in the eastern province, life remained normal
with all services operating. The Tamil and Muslim people in the
northeast are demanding the government to release the lands that are
still occupied by the military, justice to the disappeared persons and
provide employment to the war-battered.
“People have been protesting now for over two months yet the government
has failed to address the issue,” Shivajilingam said. Some of the lands
held over three decades have been released since 2015. But Tamils
complain of slow progress. Commenting on the protest, government
spokesman and minister of health Rajitha Senaratne said the relatives of
the disappeared people in some cases had provided photographic evidence
that they had been seen under government care since the end of the
conflict in 2009. “We will investigate such cases but we are unable to
issue death certificates in respect of the disappeared as we have no
proof,” Senaratne said.
In August last year, Sri Lanka’s parliament has unanimously approved a
bill to set up an office to help find some 65,000 people reported
missing during the country’s civil war with the LTTE (1983-2009), and
clarify the circumstances under which they disappeared. Relatives of the
missing people had alleged that the Lankan state—particularly its army,
navy and police—were behind most of the disappearances. Many Lankan
soldiers and LTTE cadres who had surrendered before the government
troops were also among the missing.
'Where else should I die but here?'
Today marks the twelfth anniversary since the abduction and murder of Tamil journalist Dharmeratnam Sivaram.
.
29Apr 2017
Sivaram, popularly known under his nom-de-plume Taraki, was abducted in
front of Bambalipitiya police station in Colombo on April 28 and was
found dead several hours later in a high security zone in Sri Lanka's
capital, which at the time had a heavy police and military presence due
to the ongoing conflict. His killers, highly suspected to be linked to
the government of then-president Chandrika Kumaratunga, were never
caught.
Tamil journalists terrorised
2005 not only saw the murder of Sivaram, but also of two other Tamil
media workers, Mr S Suhirtharajan, Trincomalee correspondent for Sudar
Oli, a Tamil daily and Ms Relanki Selvarajah, Tamil broadcaster.
The anniversary of his death became a macabre display of impunity, with
government-linked hit men using the day to terrorise Tamil journalists,
murdering more media personnel around the same day over the next two
years.
Two Uthayan staffers were killed a
few days after the paper marked Sivaram's death anniversary in 2006. On
29 April 2007, the Uthayan's Selvarajah Rajivarman, 25, was shot and killed by a lone gunman riding a motorbike in Jaffna.
None of the killers were ever caught.
'Shameful crime'
Sivaram was the editor of TamilNet and contributed to a number of other
publications throughout his career, including the Daily Mirror, the
Sunday Times, the Island and the Virakesari, and was also closely
involved with the Tamil Guardian and the development of its staff.
His views and analysis on the Tamil national struggle and military
strategy were in regular demand from the diplomatic community and NGOs,
and his death was widely condemned, including by the LTTE, Reporters Sans Frontiers and the Committee to Protect Journalists. Several Sinhala journalists, many of whom had worked with Sivaram also paid tribute to his work. UNESCO's director general called the murder a "shameful crime", in a statement marking World Press Freedom Day.
Fearless
Sivaram faced threats to his life throughout his career, but when urged
by friends to leave the island, he often said "Where else should I die
but here?".
The Uthayan in an editorial marking
his death said he "lived in the Sinhala chauvinists’ den and fearlessly
exposed to the world the Sri Lankan state’s false propaganda and
repression of the Tamil people."
“Sivaram didn’t raise his voice for Tamil nationalism while living in
the safety of a foreign country or away from government controlled areas
of this island. His pen started to undermine the Sinhala chauvinists’
ambitions just as the armed fighters did on the battlefield. That is why
government terror was unleashed upon him," the Uthayan said.
The LTTE conferred the "Maamanithar" title upon the journalist, the highest civilian honour of the movement.
"Tamil people have lost today a highly principled man who deeply loved
them and the Tamil Nation. A voice that echoed the freedom of the Tamil
people and their homeland, Tamil Eelam had been silenced today. An
eminent Tamil journalist had fallen victim to the enemy’s act of
cowardice," LTTE leader V Prabhakaran said in a statement at the time.
Below is an excerpt from a speech delivered
by former Tamil Guardian editor Vino Kanapathipillai in London in 2010,
at an event marking the fifth anniversary of the death of Sivaram.
"The Tamil Guardian has had a relation with Sivaram almost since it
began. He was instructor and mentor to the longer-serving volunteers on
the paper. He taught us not only how to write, but how to think through
the complexities of politics; to go beyond a surface analysis of a
problem and explore the underlying structural movements. For this we are
grateful.
"As long as the oppression of Tamils continues, so too must the struggle
for Tamil rights. Most of us knew Sivaram through our engagement in
this struggle. I think it behoves us all to continue to remain
committed, in whatever field we are in, to continue his resistance."
Dharmeratnam 'Taraki' Sivaram
11 August 1959 - 28 April 2005
Murdered editor champion of Tamil cause - BBC (29 Apr 2005)
FCA condemns Sivaram slaying -TamilNet (29 Apr 2005)
'Sivaram was a terrorist journalist' - JHU - TamilNet (03 May 2005)
Marking or silencing the enemy? (31 Aug 2005)
2005 ‘black year’ for Tamil scribes (22 Mar 2006)
Tamil media caught in ‘hellish cycle of violence’ (23 Aug 2006)
Waiting for justice, indefinitely (05 Jan 2012)
10 years on the situation for Tamil journalists in the North-East is yet to see much change.
See also:
Uthayan journalists do not feel free – Editor (10 Apr 2015)
Tamil journalists threatened by police in Jaffna (08 Apr 2015)
Today marks the twelfth anniversary since the abduction and murder of Tamil journalist Dharmeratnam Sivaram.
.29Apr 2017
29Apr 2017
Sivaram, popularly known under his nom-de-plume Taraki, was abducted in
front of Bambalipitiya police station in Colombo on April 28 and was
found dead several hours later in a high security zone in Sri Lanka's
capital, which at the time had a heavy police and military presence due
to the ongoing conflict. His killers, highly suspected to be linked to
the government of then-president Chandrika Kumaratunga, were never
caught.
Tamil journalists terrorised
2005 not only saw the murder of Sivaram, but also of two other Tamil
media workers, Mr S Suhirtharajan, Trincomalee correspondent for Sudar
Oli, a Tamil daily and Ms Relanki Selvarajah, Tamil broadcaster.
The anniversary of his death became a macabre display of impunity, with
government-linked hit men using the day to terrorise Tamil journalists,
murdering more media personnel around the same day over the next two
years.
Two Uthayan staffers were killed a
few days after the paper marked Sivaram's death anniversary in 2006. On
29 April 2007, the Uthayan's Selvarajah Rajivarman, 25, was shot and killed by a lone gunman riding a motorbike in Jaffna.
None of the killers were ever caught.
'Shameful crime'
Sivaram was the editor of TamilNet and contributed to a number of other
publications throughout his career, including the Daily Mirror, the
Sunday Times, the Island and the Virakesari, and was also closely
involved with the Tamil Guardian and the development of its staff.
His views and analysis on the Tamil national struggle and military
strategy were in regular demand from the diplomatic community and NGOs,
and his death was widely condemned, including by the LTTE, Reporters Sans Frontiers and the Committee to Protect Journalists. Several Sinhala journalists, many of whom had worked with Sivaram also paid tribute to his work. UNESCO's director general called the murder a "shameful crime", in a statement marking World Press Freedom Day.
Fearless
Sivaram faced threats to his life throughout his career, but when urged
by friends to leave the island, he often said "Where else should I die
but here?".
The Uthayan in an editorial marking
his death said he "lived in the Sinhala chauvinists’ den and fearlessly
exposed to the world the Sri Lankan state’s false propaganda and
repression of the Tamil people."
“Sivaram didn’t raise his voice for Tamil nationalism while living in
the safety of a foreign country or away from government controlled areas
of this island. His pen started to undermine the Sinhala chauvinists’
ambitions just as the armed fighters did on the battlefield. That is why
government terror was unleashed upon him," the Uthayan said.
The LTTE conferred the "Maamanithar" title upon the journalist, the highest civilian honour of the movement.
"Tamil people have lost today a highly principled man who deeply loved
them and the Tamil Nation. A voice that echoed the freedom of the Tamil
people and their homeland, Tamil Eelam had been silenced today. An
eminent Tamil journalist had fallen victim to the enemy’s act of
cowardice," LTTE leader V Prabhakaran said in a statement at the time.
Below is an excerpt from a speech delivered
by former Tamil Guardian editor Vino Kanapathipillai in London in 2010,
at an event marking the fifth anniversary of the death of Sivaram.
"The Tamil Guardian has had a relation with Sivaram almost since it
began. He was instructor and mentor to the longer-serving volunteers on
the paper. He taught us not only how to write, but how to think through
the complexities of politics; to go beyond a surface analysis of a
problem and explore the underlying structural movements. For this we are
grateful.
"As long as the oppression of Tamils continues, so too must the struggle
for Tamil rights. Most of us knew Sivaram through our engagement in
this struggle. I think it behoves us all to continue to remain
committed, in whatever field we are in, to continue his resistance."
Dharmeratnam 'Taraki' Sivaram
11 August 1959 - 28 April 2005
Murdered editor champion of Tamil cause - BBC (29 Apr 2005)
FCA condemns Sivaram slaying -TamilNet (29 Apr 2005)
'Sivaram was a terrorist journalist' - JHU - TamilNet (03 May 2005)
Marking or silencing the enemy? (31 Aug 2005)
2005 ‘black year’ for Tamil scribes (22 Mar 2006)
Tamil media caught in ‘hellish cycle of violence’ (23 Aug 2006)
Waiting for justice, indefinitely (05 Jan 2012)
10 years on the situation for Tamil journalists in the North-East is yet to see much change.
See also:
Uthayan journalists do not feel free – Editor (10 Apr 2015)
Tamil journalists threatened by police in Jaffna (08 Apr 2015)
Sunday, April 30, 2017
In the chaotic merry-go-round characterizing the drafting of Sri Lanka's
proposed Counter-Terror Act (CTA), the periodic surfacing of one
version followed by another has given rise to unexpected horrors. Every
time that a new draft emerges or must I say, is 'extracted' with great
pain out of a process gripped by skullduggery and secrecy, its devious
drafters conceive new and ingenious ways to confound scrutiny.
Legal clauses to mask and deceive
Even as one objection is taken to categorically dangerous definitions of proposed offenses, these are whipped away, soothing the unwary. Yet later, they emerge, clothed in chameleon colors to mask and deceive. Nothing proves this point better than the CTA draft that went before the Cabinet of Ministers this week. This includes hasty revisions made on the cusp of a suddenly suspenseful vote in the European Parliament seeking a rejection of the EU GSP Plus facility which was defeated.
Ostensibly, its contents were supposed to have improved. Yet what we see
is not reassuring. The draft reeks of bad faith and is an
extraordinarily contradictory. Indeed and outrageously so, it
contradicts explanations for drafting positions taken by the drafters
themselves.
Two glaring examples will suffice for the moment. The initial CTA
version leaked to this newspaper last year had included the offense of
espionage. Following public concern, this was removed in a later
version. As formally recorded, the reason given for this removal was
because this offense would more properly belong to a separate National
Intelligence Act.
But now, in the face of that very explanation, various offenses under
espionage were sneakily restored to the latest draft while omitting the
sub-heading 'espionage.' Thus, the offensive of 'abetment' is defined to
include 'gathering confidential information' if linked to 'terrorist'
or terrorist related offenses. Treacherous consequences which may ensue
are tied into the very broad definitions of terrorism related
offenses. In addition, confidential information has been vaguely defined
inter alia as information that may adversely affect public safety.
Scant protections in a dysfunctional system
Risks inherent in which they are not mitigated by 'good faith' with 'due diligence' and 'for the benefit of the public in the print and electronic media or in any academic publication.' It is interesting that this protection is only for 'registered' media. Meanwhile a notable omission in those given protection is online media which should sound warning signals for cyber advocates.
In any event, the terms such as 'good faith' and 'due diligence' provide scant protection in a dysfunctional judicial and prosecutorial process. Provisions that are perfectly reasonable in the functional Rule of Law systems assume sinister meaning connotations here because of that reality. This is not an abstract point as far less hazardous Prevention of Terrorism Act (PTA) was wielded against journalists and critics for decades.
Bitter animosity against the Rajapaksa regime was manifest in that regard. Why are we beckoning to laws that may provide greater opportunities for political repression? This is a baffling question.
Reinventing previous 'vague' terms
In another equally furtive move, the term 'unity' in relation to the definition of 'terrorist' and terrorism related offense 'has been brought back. Earlier, this was removed after persistent criticism. As the drafters themselves admitted, the term was vague. Classifying a terrorist related offence If one writes or talks in a manner that may offend 'unity' (subjective in its very essence) is the perilous to say the least.
But wondrously, this week's CTA restores 'unity' as a component of
'Offenses of Terrorism' and other related offenses. Culpability arises
when acts are known or reasonably believed to adversely affect the
'unity, territorial integrity, sovereignty, national security or defense
of Sri Lanka.' The related offenses are repetitive and vaguely
defined. They include 'specified terrorist offenses', 'aggravated
criminal offenses associated with terrorism', 'offenses associated with
terrorism' as well as 'terrorism related offenses' and 'abetting
terrorism and terrorist organizations.'
Thus, speaking or writing that 'causes harm to the' unity, territorial
integrity or sovereignty of Sri Lanka, 'amounts to abetting terrorism
and terrorists. That this proposed offense is not to affect the exercise
of a 'fundamental right' in 'good faith' is a sop thrown to the
needy. Its efficacy depends on a vigorous Supreme Court conscious of its
constitutional role and a vigilant civil society. With some exceptions,
one can not profess a great deal of confidence in either.
Where is this famed 'accountability'?
Meanwhile police powers in compelling bank statements, calling for information from service providers and senior public officials etc without applying for a magisterial warrant can now be met with with rejection to comply. Further action is only through activation of the legal process which is some relief at least. However, a suspect's right to immediate access continue to be held by qualifications rendering it meaningless. Here too, the revised amendment to the Code of Criminal Procedure Act appears to be right after but then craftily denies it later.
In sum, the contents of that amendment and the revised CTA draft appear
to be an uncomfortable exercise in 'lies and deception.' Indeed, it is
an insult to assume that masking language and offenses will not result
in the pretence being exposed. As repeated ad nauseam in these column
spaces, both these amendments must have been publicized by the
Government of Sri Lanka and extensively subjected to detailed
independent scrutiny. But the converse takes place.
In the minimum, the CTA draft has not yet been sent to the Human Rights Commission of Sri Lanka (HRCSL). This is despite the fact that the mandate of the HRCSL (Section 10 (c) and (d) of Act, No 21 of 1996), is to advise and assist the government in 'formulating legislation ... in furtherance of the promotion and protection Of fundamental rights' and to recommend on compliance with international human rights norms and standards. The contempt thus shown for a prescribed statutory process is nothing short of scandalous.
Menacing eventualities before us
Once the document is in the Bill of Parliament, there is only limited time for challenge if needs be in Court. This absurd and counterproductive scramble in forcing through laws is deplorable. Whatever revisions that may take place at the committee stage to this bill is also out of our hands.
Certainly these are menacing and high risk for a law that can be used to crucify Sri Lankan citizens by present or potential as may be.
SOC refuses to recommend regulations on tax concessions
2017-04-29
The
Sectoral Oversight Committee (SOC) on Finance has refused to recommend
the proposed regulations, under the Excise Special Provisions Act,
granting tax concessions because they have been formulated with the
intention of giving concessions to selected companies.
2017-04-29The
Sectoral Oversight Committee (SOC) on Finance has refused to recommend
the proposed regulations, under the Excise Special Provisions Act,
granting tax concessions because they have been formulated with the
intention of giving concessions to selected companies.
Chairman of the SOC on Finance, MP M.A. Sumanthiran who presented the
committee report in Parliament yesterday highlighted the fact that
concessions have been recommended to only 23 companies though there are
hundreds of others who are eligible for tax concessions.
“Concessions have been recommended for companies owned by fathers and
sons,” MP Sumanthiran said and added that the criteria applied on
selecting the 23 companies were not clear. (Yohan Perera and Ajith Siriwardana)
SRI LANKAN PRESIDENT CALLS ON FORMER ARMY COMMANDER TO “DISCIPLINE THE COUNTRY”
By K. Ratnayake .-29/04/2017
Sri Lankan President Maithripala Sirisena has called upon Field Marshal
Sarath Fonseka to resign from the government’s ministry and return to
the position of army commander. In a bid to “discipline the country,”
Fonseka would be head of the country’s three armed forces for two years.
The Story Of Doing It In Our Own Language
By Mahesan Niranjan –April 29, 2017
Prof. Mahesan Niranjan
Yesterday, in the pub, my partner – the Sri Lankan Tamil fellow
Sivapuranam Thevaram – and I discussed education. It is topical in Sri
Lanka, because we hear a lot about senior appointments, killing dogs,
private medical education, admissions and the cruel treatment of
freshers. My friend has observed some of the good and bad in the system,
and the comparisons he makes with institutions elsewhere make
interesting topics of conversation. Today we drifted into the medium of
instruction, educating in Sinhala and Tamil, known as Swabasha. Thevaram described to me his early encounters with this policy, from his childhood memories.
One
evening, the Sivapuranam family were seated at their dining table for a
candle-lit supper. “Candle-lit?” you ask. You are annoyed that the
family suffered from a colonial subject mind-set, trying to keep up
appearances. Pause, I beg you, electricity had not reached the northern
village of Karainagar, so candles and kerosene lamps were the sources of
light.
Yet
the villagers – who had neither electricity nor running water – had a
thirst for knowledge. Just the previous month, several had gathered
round a radio, listened to the running commentary on short wave of the
Apollo 11 Mission and cheered loudly when the moon-landing was
announced. Sivapuranam, Thevaram’s father, had enlisted two guys to
climb up coconut trees in the backyard and construct an antenna for the
valve operated radio, powered by a car battery.
Their dinner conversation started with the classic middle-class Tamil mother’s daily question to the son: “Putha (son), what did you study at school today?”
“We studied about carbon-di-oxide, mummy,” Thevaram replied.
Now,
Sivakami did not know any Chemistry. But, having attended the village
posh school, she knew English. This was enough for her to grasp that
there was something called carbon which is the stuff she burnt in the
stove, something called oxygen, which was essential to keep the fuel
burning and somehow you needed one of the former and two of the latter
to make the substance of which her offspring had become knowledgeable.
She was pleased, yet a little humbled because she herself had spent
three years in Hilltop, studying Sanskrit.
“Of what use is that?” Thevaram often teased her of her Sanskrit education.
“That is what scholarship was all about,” she would reply. “The suddha went
to the posh schools of Eaton and Winchester, followed by Oxford or
Cambridge to read Latin. So we did the same. And why do we need the suddha’s dead language, when we have our own dead language?”
Suddha did, we did, and we did it in ours. But we were proud when we did it in ours!
Joining the conversation, Penelope, Thevaram’s grandmother, also wanted to know what it was the boy had studied. “Enna raasa (what
darling)?” she inquired. Penelope loved her grandson dearly and was
very proud of the little brat. She insisted the grandson was fair
skinned, though no sensitive optical instrument could detect this. He
was just the same as the village farmers who spent the whole day in the
scorching sun.
She
had in her mind a hierarchy that was black and white — a ranking
maintained to this day the world over, including in the marriage
advertisements of the Ceylon Daily Noise and the Virkesari.
Exclusive: Sri Lanka — New Instruments from Israel to boost Surveillance!
( April 29, 2017, Colombo, Sri Lanka Guardian) The
government of Sri Lanka which claimed for the practice of “Good
Governance” has ordered the new shipment of ultra-technological tools
produced by companies based in Israel to monitor, restore and analysis
the data on any type of communications instruments (devices) used by
anyone within the Sri Lankan territory. Most of those tools are well
functioning since the beginning of this year.
According to well-informed sources, with these new tools, the authority
will have the facility to read, store and share any type of email
communication shared or stored by third parties through any Internet
Service Providers (ISPs) in the country.
“This, I believe, is a new era of surveillance on any person and major
development of the deep state in Sri Lanka”, a reliable source told the Sri Lanka Guardian.
There are larger numbers of private as well as semi-government entities
in Israeli produced larger scales of tools for the surveillance. Many
authorities around the globe including National Security Agency (NSA)
frequently used to visit Tel Aviv to buy their products.
Sooner after the Declaration of the State of Israel in 1948, the
authority has created the clear-cut path for the innovation of advanced
technologies. Most of them later focused on the Surveillance Technology,
and the country turned into the hub on that particular technology in
recent past.
According to the Privacy International’s Annual Report; “There are 27
surveillance companies with headquarters in Israel in the SII
(Surveillance Industry Index). Out of the top five countries represented
in SII, Israel is home to by far the largest amount per capita, with
0.33 companies per 100,000 people located in Israel, compared to 0.04 in
the United States and 0.16 in the United Kingdom.”
Unconfirmed sources informed the Sri Lanka Guardian that the officials have signed the contracts with the companies such as Mer Group, Ability Inc.
‘Mer Group’, a company which was first established as a metal workshop
later turned into the Surveillance Product Company. It is one of the
best companies run by retired security persons in Israel.
In an investigative article originally appeared on The Intercept,
one of the best US-based independent journals, “The Company’s CEO, Nir
Lempert, is a 22-year veteran of Unit 8200, the Israeli intelligence
unit often compared to the National Security Agency, and is also the
chairman of Unit’s alumni association. The Mer Group’s ties to Unit 8200
are hardly unique in Israel, where the cyber sector has become an
integral aspect of the Israeli economy, exporting $6 billion worth of
products and services in 2014.”
Meanwhile, “In the age of Social Media and Big Data, the difficulties of
intelligence work lie not so much in obtaining information as in making
sense of the huge quantities of information that are already available.
Identifying the relevant information and piecing together a picture of
real world threats is the key to preventing and investigating crime,
fraud and terrorism in the 21st century,” Mer Group has noted in its
introduction to the Mer Group’s SAIP suite.
“Mer Group’s SAIP suite was created by the intelligence experts who rely
on proven experiences and best practices developed in Israel to deliver
excellent intelligence and investigations solutions for law enforcement
forces, intelligence agencies and corporations. The SAIP suite contains
3 innovative systems based on the cutting edge technology and know-how
developed to deal with the critical tasks of analysing and managing data
from disparate sources, leveraging the power of social media and
countering cyber threats,” the compnay’s memoranda SAIP suite further
noted.
“SAIP offers a suite of solutions consisting of:
OSCAR – Open Source Collection, Analysis and Response
ECAROS – Enterprise Collection, Analysis for Real-time Operations System
CIFER – Content Intelligence – Fact Finding, Evolution & Rating
CARTA – Cyber Analytics for Risks and Threats Assessment
Combining these capabilities together, SAIP suite delivers the right information to the right person at the right time.”
“It is unclear that the Government of Sri Lanka has already ordered Mer
Group’s SAIP suite but the officials have unanimously expressed the
concern of buying,” reliable sources from Mer Group has disclosed.
“Despite all flourished words to restore the rule of law the Government
of Sri Lanka is continuing their old path to eliminate the people who
fight against injustice”, a key player who fought to bring the new
Government, said.
However, according to the Defence establishment, these new tools can be
used to identify the threats which could help to prevent crimes as well
as acts against the State.
Nonetheless, restoring third party communications without a proper Court
order or consent of the subject is illegal and all member states of the
United Nations are obliged to respect the rights to privacy of its
citizen. Despite the law, the many authorities are practising the
surveillance while breaking fundamentals of rights to privacy.
Therefore, the global resistance against the illegal surveillance has
erupted. The global resistance has led the United Nations to establish a
new mandate holder on this subject. Joseph A. Cannataci, the UN Special
Rapporteur on the Right to Privacy (SRP) has appointed last year (2016)
and his first report was issued on March 2016.
Seven key thematic areas were identified for his mandate, to be prioritised throughout consultations:
- Privacy and personality across cultures;
- Corporate online business models and personal data use;
- Security, Surveillance, Proportionality and Cyberspace;
- Open Data and Big Data analysis: impact on Privacy;
- Genetics and Privacy;
- Privacy, dignity and reputation;
- Biometrics and Privacy.
“Sri Lanka as a country claimed to defeat the ‘authoritative regime’ and
established true principles of democracy, is now exercising same
strategies to eliminate the possible political challenges under the
pretext of national security,” a retired defence source told the Sri Lanka Guardian.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)