Defending repression and denying repression are very different
Dayan during President Premadasa’s time defended Stalinist repression in an article published in the Daily News. To defend repression and to deny the existence of repression are two different things. There may be those who believe that repression is justified for ideological reasons. However, to deny repression when it exists is a completely different thing. It is deception.
There are people who believe that repression is necessary for establishing a type of stability, or even certain developments that they wish to achieve. However, such beliefs have lead to disastrous consequences. Two examples which demonstrate the catastrophic consequences that such an idea can lead to are the experiences of Cambodia and Burma.
Within just four years, Pol Pot caused one of the greatest human disasters in history. Pol Pot sincerely believed in the Stalinist idea of repression as the means of achieving great things. He had a vision of a new society and new ways of bringing prosperity to Cambodia. However, his style of repression, based on the Stalinist model, caused the complete collapse of the economy and the deaths of 1/7 of the population. The whole idea of the administration of justice disappeared during this period and it has proven an almost impossible task to rebuild it. In the post-Pol Pot Cambodia, nobody understands what ‘law’ means. By words like ‘police’ or ‘judges’, the people merely understand party functionaries who will defend the system. The idea of protection through law and justice is completely alien.
I had occasion to watch this sad situation for almost three years, as I was myself engaged with the United Nations, particularly working in the area of assistance to judicial reforms. The extent of the loss of the memory of justice can be manifest through one incident: At a meeting with the Minister of Justice, I pointed out that some things had to be done in order to address the issue of the independence of the judiciary. The Minister of Justice replied emphatically, “Do not worry about this! I will make them independent!” That is how the conception of law and the administration of justice can disappear when people are exposed to extreme forms of repression. I have been associated with many Cambodians who are struggling to introduce the rule of law and democracy into Cambodia. They realised, along with me, that it will take very many more decades and the investment of extensive resources if Cambodia is to return to the situation prior to the Pol Pot regime; and even before that time, Cambodia had a very backward rule of law system.
General Ne Win of Burma was a different kind of admirer of Stalin. He wanted to amass power and wealth for himself. During Ne Win’s rule in Burma, all benefits went to his family and to a few friends, who were the only ones he trusted in terms of administration. But his style of repression was also Stalinist, and he called it the Burmese way of socialism. From the point of view of administration of justice, the result of this repression was the same. People lost all memory of what the law, judges and civilian policing meant. One of my friends is doing doctoral research into the way the administration of justice process was completely displaced in Burma. This displacement was so much that when, recently, a UN Rapporteur inquired from some prisoners about whether they receive assistance from lawyers, the prisoners replied, “What are lawyers?” Perhaps they could have also asked, “What is a trial?”
The idea of protection through law is something that no Burmese in the country can now comprehend. The law is seen as an instrument of the denial of protection and a tool of repression. There are numerous cases that have been documented which expose the absurdity of it all.
To a great extent this has already happened in Sri Lanka, and if this repression continues in the way it exists now it will not take Sri Lankans long to acquire the same mentalities regarding law and administration of justice as the Cambodians or the Burmese. Already, the extent to which there is loss of meaning of legality and illegality within Sri Lanka is quite manifest. There are enough writings exposing how Sri Lanka has become a lawless place.
Anyway, to defend a Stalinist style of repression is one thing. But to deny that such a repression exists in Sri Lanka is quite another. Can anyone argue that the human rights situation in Sri Lanka is now better than during President Premadasa’s time? If one goes by the paramount law, which is the 1978 Constitution that allowed President Premadasa to do what he did, that remains the same still. The emergency laws and the Prevention of Terrorism laws have given even more power to the security apparatus. The absence of criminal investigations into extrajudicial killings, disappearances, torture and the like are much more prominent now than before. Attacks on journalists and the media have also risen in number and extent of violence. Arbitrary arrest and detention and politically motivated trials are also part of the present scene. Nepotism is much more visible and corruption is much more widespread. No one knows whether there are any means for any legal protection.
Someone may defend such repression, either honestly or otherwise, for ideologically reasons. However, denying such repression when it exists is pure deception.
76 Comments
Leave a Reply
Subscribe to Content Updates
iPhone app
Basil Fernando
I read all of your posts here with a great interest. I’m thankful to you , sir, for taking a brave stand on the behalf of 300 000 Tamil civilians. You seem to care a lot for the three hundred thousand innocent people, who are still languishing in the concentration camps, which is a honourable action within itself.
I wonder, if you can remember the M.P. Mr. Kanagaratnam, who is now in detention by the GOSL, said, quoting official figures, that the population of Wanni was 470000 at the beginning of the war in North. Only around 400000 are said to be in the 41 concentration camps. Where is the missing population? Could GOSL be accountable for this?
The Sri Lanka (SL) Administration has been saying that it could not resettle 300 000 unlawfully held IDPs held in Vavuniyaa camps as their villages in Vanni region are not completely de-mined.
At that same the SL Regime t is issuing statements to the effect that it has launched several development projects in Ki’linochchi, Mannaar, Jaffna and Vavuniyaa including restoration of electricity supply under the title “Northern Spring “(Vaddakkin Vasantham).
How could the government launch development projects in areas which are still sown with mines? Hence the Sri Lanka government’s stand on resettlement is contradictory.
There are some areas in Vanni infested with mines, but vast areas without them. The SL Administration can resettle large numbers IDP families in these mine-free areas.
Mmmmmm… interesting???
Our ‘Maha Raja’ seems to admire Col.Gaddafi. Birds of a feather…flock together…hmmm…luck us.
This is a new Alphabet for the people living in the ‘Small Miracle.’
A is for Abductions that take place daily, usually blamed on aliens.
B is for Benz Bikkus who live in the lap of luxury.
C is for Censorship of TV programmes showing scenes of alcohol and tobacco.
D is for Doctor Delipihiya, patron saint of murder and mayhem.
E is for Elections which are neither free nor fair.
F is for Freedom of abduction, harassment and imprisonment under the Prevention of Terrorism Act.
G is for Gullible majority who have been hoodwinked since 1948.
H is for Human rights abuses that occur 465 days of the year.
I is for Independence also known as the 61 Year Curse’. (We were better off under the British!)
J is for Jayasuriya, who will probably play until the 2043 World Cup or until he gets his EPF?
K is for Kassipu. (A bottle a day keeps the liver awake.)
L is for Lies, damned lies and statistics that the government media saturates us with each day.
M is for Mahinda chinthanaya. (Who needs the Bible, Koran and Tripitaka when we have the ‘chinthanaya.’
N is for Nepotism or favoritism to relatives. (Also check R)
O is for the 17 Patriotic Opposition MPs who crossed over to the government to save the country.
P is for Pillayan, who became Chief Minister of the East using the ‘Bullet’ to get the ‘Ballot.’
Q is for Question mark? When will the war ‘really’ end? When pigs fly or when hell freezes over?
R is for Rajapaksa poshanaya of Mahinda, Basil, Goatabaya and Chamal.
T is for Terrorism. Both the LTTE kind and the State sponsored kind.
U is for Underestimate. What the Government always does of the LTTE and the Tamils.
V is for Velupillai Prabahakaran…may he rest in pieces.
W is for Wickramasinghe (Ranil). The greatest President that never governed Sri Lanka.
X is for Xenophobia or the island mentality. The dislike of all things foreign.
Y is for Yearning for yesterday. The national pastime of living in the past.
Z is for Zero casualties in the war against the LTTE.
President Bean – excellent alphabet for the people of the “small miracle”! I suspect we could also compile a special Sri Lankan dictionary that explains the current “terminology” highlighting both what it is supposed to mean, and what it actually means.
To quote a line from a film – Princess Bride – “you keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means”! We have many such words in currency today. Freedom, democracy, rights, welfare, equality, minority, majority …
No wonder the AHRC statements on Sri Lanka never cut any ice at the UN HRC. Amnesty International was taken far more seriously, and treated by GOSL representatives with far greater circumspection, even respect, not least due to its iron rule that statements on a country situation will not be made by AI officials originating from that country. AHRC would be much better served if Mr. Fernando were not the one making statements on Sri Lanka. Editing his statements, limiting their inordinate length and incessant frequency, might be a useful first step.
President Bean:
Haven’t you mastered the English alphabet yet? What happened to the letter “S”? Surely, you must know that the English alphabet consists of 26 letters. Since you missed the “S”, let me fill it in for you:
S is for the sour, smoulderingJins who are now reduced to tormenting the public with sappy poems because their pay checks are shrinking as they stupidly rooted for the striped crew who had their sorry derrieres beaten by the small miracle guys!
@Dayan: we can all learn to be brief and to the point.
Speaking of the point, is Mr Fernando right or wrong when he writes about Sri Lanka becoming a repressive state, where the law has less and less meaning?
This discussion is about the nature of the Sri Lankan state and its repressive apparatus. The ideas that I have expressed are my personal views and therefore I will not walk into the trap Dayan sets, to divert the discussion into the organizations that I am associated with. As I mentioned above, Dayan excels in the Brahminical art of evading the basic issues raised in a discussion. Particularly in this discussion, the issue is if the defense of repression during President Premadasa’s time and, theoretically, the repression of Stalin himself, as evidenced by his earlier writings. The continuous evolution of the repressive machinery of Sri Lanka, beginning with the 1972 Constitution, perfected in 1978 and continued up to date, with ever increasing displacement of law has been the issue raised.
About the issue of taking things seriously, Dayan is right. In his various linkages to various political parties and personalities, and also in his short period of representing GoSL as ambassador, he has not paid any serious attention to Sri Lanka’s vital problems of rule of law, democracy and human rights. In fact, a defender of repression cannot take any of these things seriously. How can such a person care about massive disappearences, extrajudicial killings, large displacements of people, a Prevention of Terrorism Act with draconian powers and the undermining of the judiciary. In fact, such a person cannot even take himself seriously, since his job as a propaganda agent for defense of repression does not allow him that. As this discussion began with Russia under Stalin, a role model for such defenders of repression, can be mention. That is, the Russian Prosecutor Andrei Vyshinsky, who without batting and eyelid defended every ugly action which took place at that time. For Vyshinsky, that was a matter of his own survival and the nature of his own profession that he had chosen.
In such situations people become victims of the rulers they serve. They are hired and fired according to the whims and fancies of their masters.
As shown, during times of repression the repressive state does not take anything seriously. In particular, they do not take the citizens seriously. In fact, the whole “legal apparatus” works to reduce citizens into zeroes and bureaucrats into cynics.
It is surprising to hear through the removed ambassador that Amnesty International has been taken seriously at least sometimes by GoSL. Then why is it that none of the call for inquiries made by Amnesty International have been complied with? Does this mean that they are taken seriously and then put into the wastepaper basket? Meanwhile, GoSL spokesman has also spoken about an international conspiracy when organizations like Amnesty International make criticisms about Sri Lanka’s human rights record. Dayan Jayatilaka should explain this. For example, how much has GoSL taken seriously Amnesty’s views regarding IDPs?
Roy Wijesiriwardana
The late Regi Siriwardena wrote of Dayan Jayatilleka thus; “the last surviving admirer of Stalin in Sri Lanka is probably Mr. Dayan Jayatilaka” [Lanka Guardian, May 1, 1996, pp.7-9].
Can any sensible person be an admirer of Joseph Stalin? Can anyone call themselves balanced and at the same time be an admirer of Joseph Stalin? Can this be done especially in the light of enormous revelations that have come after the archives in the Kremlin were opened? Can anyone claim to have a sense of history or appreciation of political science while not acknowledging the nature of the totalitarian system that was created by the evil genius of Stalin? What kind of history and what kind of political science are we teaching in our universities? Is it a surprise that admirers of Stalin find no difficulty in accepting the authoritarian system that has been imposed on Sri Lanka by constitutional means?
Those who find no difficulty in admiring the atrocities that were committed through that kind of authoritarianism as that of Stalin may not have any difficulty in condoning mass murder, war crimes, and all other gross human rights abuses continuously committed in all parts of Sri Lanka since 1971. What is there to say about those who talk against the evil politics of Wijeweera or Prabahakaran but admire politics of Stalin?
Gee, Mr. Basil, why are you so in love with Stalin? I mean you just can’t seem to stop talking about the man.
@In Your Face…
Have you considered the possibility that what Basil Fernando has may not be “in love with Stalin” but have a deep “love” for Sri Lanka?
And that because of that “love”, he attempts to learn from the past and history of other nations of the world.
And from that learning, he attempts to share with others something of his thoughts.
And from those thoughts we could actually engage and debate about the state of this nation, and choose to agree or disagree (preferably without the generally accompanying mud slinging!)
In Sri Lanka when the law is enacted it is repressive. According to some people Sri Lanka should be a state which is not allowed to defend it self, cannot arrest criminals and just agree to everything the West & UN dictate to us in general. When you give up on those rights we become a non “repressive” state. I’d rather die a “repressed man”!
West & the coalition is the biggest repressive state invading countries willy nilly. Iran next! Where are the Gulag equations when it is gob smack in your face?? Oh Basil… (with the tone of Sybil in Fawlty Towers
)
In Your Face,
Unfortunately human beings can not escape thinking about their tormentors. We have our local tormentors . Sometimes in order to understand them, we also have to think about their role models.
To live under repression and not to think about it, don’t you think is foolish.
But Dayan is said to be admiring Stalin, one of the world’s worst tormentors ever to live. Ether, he is politically ignorant or what?.. politically insane?
In Your Face does try to face the reality.
Mr. Fernando,
You have noted correctly that Mr. Jayatilleka evades serious debate and indulges in redherring all the time in defense of his sordid political associations, from Premadsa to Rajapaksa and Devananda. The Rajapaksa regime has shown, by its dismissal of Mr. Jayatilleka, that it didn’t give a hoot to his high-faluting act in Geneva.
The regime only needed some one to defend it from criticism of its barbaric human rights abuses and sheer duplicity.. The regime had zero credibility; nobody took its promises and denial of murders seriously. And yet, Mr. Jayatilleka gamely defended such a criminal regime ,much to the amusement of the regime itself; A murderer always knowing laughs when an advocate is trying to deflect the blame for the murder on some innocent character, and deep down has no respect for such an ‘advocate.’ That was precisely what happened to Mr. Jayatilleka– the murderer’s contempt for the sycophantic, duplicitous ‘advocate’ eventually sent him back to Colombo.
You are also right that defenders of Stalin have no place in civil society today; the only reson anyone takes Jayatilleka seriously is that he writes well in English, but his readers know that beneath all that high-faluting language, there is a clear moral turpitude.
Mr. Basil Fernando,
Ah….then you are not in love with Stalin? Naughty, naughty, thought you could fool me, eh? It’s okay, I won’t tell anyone – it’ll just be our little secret. Hush….
Smoulderingjin,
What’s that you say? Something about “loving” Sri-Lanka? It’s so nice to know that you and Mr.Basil Fernando have so much love for our small miracle. How sweet…You really care about the poor people in Sri-Lanka,eh? I know, I know, you have sacrificed so much for the ordinary people of Sri-Lanka it makes me so teary eyed…Booh..hoo… hoo.
Oh, you people are such sweety pies filled to the brim with syrup! Move over maple syrup, here comes the new ‘Lanka Lovin” team!
I have read Sri Lanka being equated to Nazis, Socialists, Pol Pots and pretty much every sorry episode of history. So just make up your mind on one regime. I think there should be a debate and agree which murderous regime is best for propaganda purposes then be consistent with it. This is just ludicrous.
The more this happens, more I start to wonder about the crazy people who lurk here. I was just watching this clip and I couldn’t help but equate Basil and some others here to the conservative right wing nuts shown in these clips.
http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/mon-september-28-2009/america–target-america
Please watch from 3:20 onwards. It’s worth it!
Obama is being accused of indoctrination. Ha! And some people are complaining MR is being hailed as a King in Sri Lanka. Geez Louise..
If Obama gets this crap are you surprised MR is getting this criticism? Yeah I thought so!! I’m just glad such comedy exists in this world for pure entertainment value.
Gulags… lol
Observer,
You have missed the point of this debate. You don’t have to die for a repressive state. You are already dead while being alive under repression.
You cannot talk your own ideas. You are absolutely helpless when completely false allegations made against you by police, military and others. You have to live in fear of being abducted. Even the mother of a rape victim will deny that any such rape took place, due to fear of greater repercussions. Unless you become a slave to your political masters, every aspect of your life is under threat.
If you talk about your sincere thoughts about things that you see as wrong, you are called a traitor. If you help your neighbor or a friend who is put into trouble unjustly, then you are again considered a traitor. If you participate in legitimate protest, again you are treated as a traitor. And the list can go on like that.
So if you do not want trouble, you just live as if you are dead. You will accept any injustice silently. You will tell your children and friends also to accept every kind of injustice silently. In fact you will say that there is nothing calls injustice at all.
You will accept every violation of your rights as an act done by the state, to defend itself. You will know your life is reduced to a joke but you will say to yourself that, that does not matter.
Is that a life worth living?
There’s no debate when you make inaccurate equations to regimes that are not justified even remotely. In fact you’re spitting in the faces of those who suffered immensely under Hitler, Pol pot, Stalin, Khamer Rouge, etc. That’s what bugs me. They deserve better respect than to UNDERMINE the horrific experiences they went through.
I know the fine line between freedom and law. Respecting the law doesn’t mean you’re repressed. If there’s a law that we don;t like we have elections to bring in an alternative. What ever administration that is there is put there by majority of the people who accept their views and democratic principles.
There is no repression far as I am concerned. To me you sound like an extremist nut. That’s all.
“If you participate in legitimate protest, again you are treated as a traitor. And the list can go on like that.”
I asked this question here before and I’ll ask again. Can you tell me of an instance where a legitimate peaceful protest was suppressed using state force this year?? Other than in the previously LTTE held areas. I may have missed something here. I just genuinely want to know.
Sure I may think of you as a traitor due to some of your views. But that’s a right I have to feel that way! You may think the same of me due to my views. That is perfectly OK.
Injustices I see daily are the gap between the poor and the rich, treating people based on their “class” in society, treating women like disposable items, robbing the vulnerable, child labour, etc. These are the injustices we need to fight! This is where our society has failed and it is a society wide issue, not any particular government.
Only economic resurrection can save us from this. We have a golden opportunity having put an end to a war now. When you make incomprehensible equations to mud the country, you’re suppressing the whole society. Remember that Mr. Fernando. When your essays work against getting GSP+, a bunch of poor girls working in garments are thats going to suffer. As if they didn’t have enough problems at home maybe getting beaten up by an abusive husband! You are working towards despicable injustices against the poorest of our nation far as I can see Mr. Fernando. If you had a grain of truth in what you say I’d say ok. But lying?
Darini Rajasingham Senanayake discusses similar issues as those discussed in this debate in a recently published article.
“The question on many minds at this time is: will militarisation be a substitute for democratisation – beyond the show of elections? The impact of 30 years of armed conflict between successive Sri Lankan governments and the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE), may be analysed in terms of human, economic, and governance costs.”?
View the article at ;
http://www.aliran.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=1043:de-militarising-democracy-and-governance-in-sri-lanka&catid=87:2009-6&Itemid=45
sorry Atheist…my mistake. ‘S’ stands for ‘Sri Lanka’ land of the deaf, dumb and blind.
Observer
Thank you, because now you are talking and the issues that need to be discussed are clearer. Unfortunately, Dayan, perhaps because he was wiser, managed to evade the discussion. So, let us discuss each issue sensibly. (You may say that I am an extremist nut but I refuse to apply similar ugly names to you because I think that it would be a stupid thing to do; as somebody already said in these comments, that kind of thing belongs to the lowest form of wit).
The first issue is the distinction between respecting the law and repression. This perhaps is the key issue. All governments are expected to maintain law and order and thereby protect the people. The governments do that by creating the strongest possible rule of law system and put all the resources necessary in order to keep that system functioning properly in order to protect the people all the time. There is coercion involved in this too however, such coercion is considered legitimate coercion and not repression.
By repression is meant the failure of the state to protect the people through the legal machinery and the judicial process.
A legal process involves a constitution which is the supreme law. It should be respected as such by the government. The government also respects all other laws. The government respects the law enforcement machinery which is the policing system that investigates crimes and brings all criminals, irrespective of whoever they are, before courts and assists the prosecutors (the Attorney General’s Department) to prosecute all criminals, and a judiciary that is allowed to operate only on the basis of the rule of law.
The central issue of Sri Lanka’s repression, as I have repeatedly said during this debate, is the 1978 Constitution and its operation for 31 years.
Its executive presidency is a system of absolute power. The constitution can be ignored by the president and all the executive presidents have in fact, ignored the constitution whenever they wanted. The 17th Amendment to the constitution and what happened to it is only one illustration of this.
The first step needed to return to a legitimate form of ruling through a proper legal system is to return to a constitutional system that recognizes checks and balances. Whether that be a presidential system as in the United States, France and many other countries or whether it be a cabinet system lead by a prime minister is not material. But that checks and balances in a way to bind the rulers and to keep them within the framework of the rule of law is of the essence.
Sri Lanka will remain a repressive state as long as the basic structure and the conceptual framework of the 1978 Constitution remains the supreme law of the country. In fact, it will be the supreme un-rule of law instrument of Sri Lanka.
Anyone knows that special laws such as emergency laws and prevention of terrorism laws are suspensions of the normal laws of the land. Some such suspensions are inevitable when there are threats to the security of the state and the people. However, here also there is a limit to the state power and as the Indian Supreme Court recognized during the time of Indira Ghandi’s regime, the limit is expressed in the words: TO THE EXTENT NECESSARY. The Indian Supreme Court held that some things that Indira Ghandi tried to do were beyond what was necessary and quashed them.
The problem of Sri Lanka’s emergency regulations and the PTA is that under such laws anything is possible including the causing of forced disappearances. To take only the issue of repression in the south it was possible to forcibly disappear 30,000 persons at least. The commissions of inquiry said that disappearances meant abductions followed by interrogation, torture, killings and disposal of bodies. Under our ‘laws’ this was possible. And these laws have expanded since the late 80s and also virtually removed the powers of the judiciary to deal with these problems. That is a further aspect of our repression and despite of the end of the ‘war’ these laws are kept in the same draconian state.
The most important law enforcement agency is the police. If you have been following the statements by the retired senior police officers, even others who are still in the department and the constant complaints of the public you will not dispute the fact that Sri Lanka’s police is a collapsed system. The police blame this on politicisation. This means politicians have made them servants out of them and not allowed them to work according to the law. This issue is documented in huge detail and there is no space in this type of a discussion to take it further.
As far as individual atrocities are concerned the answer to your request, ‘give a single instance where legitimate protests were suppressed’ follows. Surely just to give some of the most obvious: you know what happened to Lasantha Wickramatunga, Poddala Jayantha and so many other journalists. The list of such instances of illegal arrest, detention, fabrication of charges and the denial of legal protection have been enumerated at length in the public media. How a person can ask such a question is to say the least, very naive.
Just a short note on your remark on the Cambodian and Burmese people: The way to pay respect for people who live under repressive regimes as those in these countries is to support their legitimate struggles to end such repression. Aung Sang Suu Kyi is doing that. To respect people and to respect those governments that represses them is not the same. In fact, by respecting such governments it is the people who are being disrespected. Naturally in this type of debate space is limited. However, factual details regarding oppression have been plentifully documented and the average Sri Lankan knows all this. You may call me an extremist nut, what I have written is based on my knowledge of the law and Sri Lanka’s legal system. I graduated from the faculty of law in 1972 and ever since I have had the closest possible association with this system as the law is my central area of interest. Those who know that part of the story know how the law was undermined and in many aspects the law has disappeared from Sri Lanka.
Hey, so has Dayan actually answered to the allegation that he made these fascist statements in support of repression in his role as key intellectual emperor-sans-clothes in this best of all possible island dictatorships, or is he just evading the issue as usual and just insulting poor old BF pompously like an underachieving loser (with a massive ego to serve and protect) as a deflection tactic?
Come on D-Man, did you say “yes’m please, and can I have another helping” to repression or didn’t you? And you can step up and let us know your true-blue feelings on the Sinhalese ownership of SL while you’re at it. You’re emerging as quite the credible voice of intellectual reason, ain’t ya? They’ll look up to you all misty eyed and revere your name for years to come. Don’t start quivering with misplaced editorial indignation and slap Basil around in retaliation, there’s a good boy. Just answer the question if you are capable.
HI Observer,
You must be living in a fools paradise, and not in the real Sri Lanka. No repression of public protest,ha,ha.
Observer…could the Tamils living in Sri Lanka have a protest in front of the Presidents house without being chucked in jail? Remember what happened to MP Nadaraja Raviraj? He was in the fore front of protests regarding the abduction of Tamils and see what happened. He was sent 6 feet under courtesy of an ‘International Conspiracy.’ (thats GOSL doublespeak)
Not only an economic resurrection can save this country…there also has to be maximum devolution of power! You can’t have your cake…and eat it as well. If you guys are not willing to grant a seperate state, you have to at least devolve power!
Following quote from Darini Rajasingham Senanayake ( reference cited above is directly relavant to this discussion;
In his book “Brave New World Order” (Orbis Books, 1992, paper), Jack Nelson Pallmeyer identified several characteristics of a National Security State, the primary one of which is “the military not only guarantees the security of the state against all internal and external enemies, it has enough power to determine the overall direction of the society.. In a National Security State the military exerts important influence over political, economic, as well as military affairs… Authentic democracy depends on participation of the people. National Security States limit such participation in a number of ways: They sow fear and thereby narrow the range of public debate. They restrict and distort information; and they define policies in secret and implement those policies through covert channels and clandestine activities. The state justifies such actions through rhetorical pleas of “higher purpose” and vague appeals to “national security.”
Mr. Observer, did you not observe that lawyers who appeared for Sunday Leader were named as traitors by Ministry of Defense and there was another grenade attack on human rights lawyers house.. You observations seem to be very limited.
Hannah Arendt’s book The Origins of Totalitarianism is also very relevant to the issues that are being presently debated. In fact, all of her work helped to develop a much more comprehensive understanding of modern totalitarianisms. A fundamental feature of such totalitarianisms is the displacement of the liberal democratic system of the administration of justice with systems of authoritarian legality. As Eichmann mentioned during his trial after his arrest by the Israeli government, the norm in Hitler’s regime was that whatever Hitler said was law. There was no point in arguing that such laws were not made by the normal parliamentary process or that such laws are opposed to the interest of the people as a whole. Arbitrary law making by a superman is an essential part of the game. Hannah Arendt’s books are a good guide to the banality of evil created by authoritarianism.
In Pakistan too, militarisation caused havoc for many decades. The last of the generals was Musharraf. He suspended the constitution and wanted to be the law in the country. He also tried to remove the chief justice and to have the Supreme Court under his thumb. Had he succeeded in these things there would have been no return at all for a long time. It was because of this that the lawyer’s movement arose. For two years people fought in the street to put back the deposed chief justice as the chief of the judiciary. After a bitter fight we succeeded. That was something. However, the chaos caused by militarisation is so great that it will take a very long time to recover.
At one time we thought that Sri Lanka’s legal system was much better than ours. Now everybody knows that it is not. Why not admit it and begin to deal with the problem?
Hi Observer, why do you want to deny widespread nepotism, curruption, abuse of power, and use of force just to keep a few people in power. Can’t you see this widespread violence done to ordinary folk. It is their country now, not ours. People no longer have any place. Don’t observe with close eyes.
Or, it may be that you are afraid to talk about what you know. Every one is now afraid. “War” is over, but fear continues and increases. Surely you can notice a dictator, when you see one. No.
http://transcurrents.com/tc/2009/10/my_life_in_menik_farm_idp_camp.html#more
Depressing bed-time reading from the best-of-all-possible-camps.
Panglossian – you ruined my evening. I am distressed not because of the bad “conditions” (although that is awful in itself) but the brutality and inhumanity within the camp. Not to mention the death of children and the way even death is not seen with any compassion.
I suspect the military presence and their treatment of people will embitter those in the camp.
Sad place for us to come to.
I can (to some degree) understand the need for security checks for LTTE, but that it has to be done in this inhuman manner, for this long, and with people treated with such brutality – that I do not understand.
Observer makes a good point: “Injustices I see daily are the gap between the poor and the rich, treating people based on their “class” in society, treating women like disposable items, robbing the vulnerable, child labour, etc. These are the injustices we need to fight! This is where our society has failed and it is a society wide issue, not any particular government… Only economic resurrection can save us from this.”
These are real problems, and an affront to a civilised society.
But the cure he suggests won’t work. Economic resurrection, if managed by the kleptocrats who run the country, will only help the rich and powerful. To address even those injustices that have forced themselves on Observer’s notice there will need to be a new regard for equality, individual rights, and the rule of law.
The rich will not stop robbing the poor and vulnerable when an improving economy lets the rich get even richer. Snobs and wealthy but selfish people will not suddenly develop care and compassionate feelings for the poor or oppressed because they get an extra car, a bigger house, or more servants. In fact sometimes it is those who have the least who display the most generosity with what little they do have — while money, power, and the love of money seem to have a corrupting influence.
The things that allow the poor to be trampled – the impunity with which leaders ransack the public purse, the lack of a robust press to hold them to account, and the lack of a functioning police and legal system to investigate and prosecute them, will not go away in the time of an economic miracle (however small or large).
And those problems (bad police, weak press, no opposition, the ignoring of the law) also mask the other problems, the ones that Observer and many others cannot or will not see. The ones they can excuse as “necessary” because they do not feel the pain. The ones they don’t notice because they are too busy with the economic recovery. The ones they hear about and fear might actually be true. The ones they cannot notice without risking treasonous thoughts, and cannot mention without risking white vans…
President Bean,
President Bean said: “sorry Atheist…my mistake. ‘S’ stands for ‘Sri Lanka’ land of the deaf, dumb and blind”.
You sound like a throwback to the eighteenth century. I have never come across anyone, today, who will be so ignorant as to label people “deaf”, “dumb” and “blind”. There are many people, around the world, born with visible and non-visible disabilities. Are you going to attach offending labels to them too? Even a child in Kindergarten has a sense of social awareness that is sadly lacking in you and your crew.
Among people with disabilities are various famous and talented people, for example, musicians, artists, academics etc… Have you heard of the pianist genius Glenn Gould? What about the renowned physicist Stephen Hawking? Stevie Wonder?
I don’t think any of you clowns – even with your five senses intact – can ever tap into the THIRD EYE which is the marking of genius.
You keep quoting from your new discovery: George Orwell’s 1984. I wonder if you ever truly grasped Orwell’s message.
You and your crew have proven, to us, time and time again bigots are uncouth and downright disrespectful of life. If you want to insult Sri-Lankan citizens, at least, be creative.
Arrivederci!
“I suspect the military presence and their treatment of people will embitter those in the camp.”
I too have wondered about this. The children in the IDP camps see the soldiers with guns day after day and the barbed wire (at some level, they understand the barbed wire to mean repression)… but even before being confined to the camps, they would have had to deal with aerial bombings and shellings… the difference is that in the camp, the *source* of frustration is there, and so it will grow into some new form. When they finally *leave* these camps, what will be the extent of emotional damage and trauma felt by these children… will it be enough to start a new insurgency? Certainly, GOSL deciding to set up four new High Security Zones in former LTTE areas will not help things.
What the *people* need is an environment free of all weapons, intimidation, reminders of the military, etc. This is why federalism would be the optimum solution. Anything else just looks like GOSL (Sinhalese) imposition.
Observer,
What do you think of the arson attack on Ranga Bandara’s house ? Does it not show abysmal lawlessness?
Can abysmal lawlessness and economic development happen at the same time?
Here arfe some thoughts on Ranga Bandara incident;
Prevention
The policing system of the country has its own capacity to detect crime and to prevent such attacks. The strength of a rule of law system is that it has sufficient bonding with the population and as a result it receives adequate information in order to avoid such events. The arson attacks on Ranga Bandara and John Pulle’s homes clearly indicate that the Sri Lankan police do not enjoy such cooperation from the population and therefore is incapable of preventing such attacks. What is even sadder is that, right or wrong, there will be the public perception that a section of the police is directly or indirectly supporting these attacks. At the very least there is no indication of a quick reaction of the fire services following the attacks to stop the complete destruction of the property.
Arrest
In a rule of law state even if such events were to take place there would be the immediate launch of a credible investigation and quick arrests of all those involved. The sad reflection in Sri Lanka is that generally there is not even the expectation that such credible inquiries will take place. Now the cynical belief that the politicians and sections of the police connive to suppress the opposition is prevalent. The popular expectation is some kind of an inquiry which will cover up the real perpetrators and perhaps would lead to the arrest of some others, who will be later released.
Expressions of indignation
In a rule of law state if even by rare chance this kind of event were to take place there would be expressions of indignation by so many, including those who might be supporters of the government, not only to condemn such actions but also to demand immediate redress. In all likelihood there would be a demand for the head of the police to resign. There would also be demands for the resignation of those in relevant government ministries. Particularly, intellectuals in various fields would express their condemnation in no uncertain terms. But in Sri Lanka, there would be no such outrage or expressions of concern. There would be many ‘intellectuals’ who are in some way connected to the government who would cynically laugh with satisfaction that such an attack has been carried out successfully. Such private celebrations on cruel attacks on other human beings are not rare in contemporary Sri Lanka. Many others would not care to protest because such protests would be considered to be incapable of producing any genuine and positive results. Besides that, some may naturally think that they would be also be considered as opponents of the government if they were to protest.
Reinforcement of the fear psychosis
In a rule of law state reactions to such events, however rarely they might happen, will reinforce the popular will to ensure that the system of the rule of law and the criminal justice system will prevail. By the pressure of the population, the threats to the rule of law system are repeatedly suppressed. However, in Sri Lanka these arson attacks will only reinforce the fear psychosis which is already wide spread. Such arson attacks are not merely attacks on particular politicians or their parties but attacks on the psychology of the population. While in a rule of law state the attempts are to uplift the psychology of the population, in Sri Lanka the constant attempt is to drag down the people’s minds and hearts.
It is this total situation of the abandonment of the rule of law that should concern anyone who cares for the future of Sri Lanka. It has now descended to abysmal lawlessness. The arson attacks are only reminders of that situation.
Mr. Fernando, so many replies don’t know how to respond to all of it. I shall be brief and let you know of some of my views purely because I don’t have time today. Disclaimer first: I have no law background so I will say upfront I’m out of your league – did not expected to discuss the legislative system in detail on this thread.
“The central issue of Sri Lanka’s repression, as I have repeatedly said during this debate, is the 1978 Constitution and its operation for 31 years.”
For those 31 years we were at war. President is the commander in chief. During war time it is not unusual that the commander in chief is given greater power than in peace time in many countries & throughout history.
Regarding constitutional reform, it’s what people have decided. Why is it that no political party that was in power took steps to reverse executive presidency so far? Because not enough people wanted it or was a priority. Otherwise the party in power would have got punished at the ballot box?
Did the constitutional checks and balances stop the US from invading Iraq based on fudged intelligence? NO! Not only that, the UK government instructed MI6 to doctor intelligence for WMDs. Did stem cell research get the green light when the US congress voted for it? No Mr. Bush vetoed it.
Did the constitutional checks and balances prevent the current UK Labour government from ripping off tax payers? No. Corruption is in every country. In Sri Lanka it maybe few billion Rupees but in the west it’s multi billion Dollars. Why do you think none of the regulators couldn’t sniff out the likes of Madoff and other “civilized” robbers while the entire financial system was at the brink of collapse? I will just smile as the answer…
So don’t tell me about Western checks and balances Mr. Fernando. I know very well all about it.
Prevention of terrorism acts were a norm post 9/11 all around the world. In UK they shot an innocent dead. In Australia they booted out some doctor accusing him wrongly a terrorist and they looked like a bunch of tarts, when it was revealed he was wrongfully deported and harassed. While I feel sorry for the above mentioned, it is unfortunate some incapable law enforcement personnel all over the world have abused these laws or simply stuffed it up. Not for these laws we’d be suffering through massive blood baths because we are giving a green pass to all human bombs in metropolitan areas.
I accept there’s rampant corruption in the police. Believe me there’s corruption in other police forces around the world too. Don’t be so naive. If they were all so clean we wouldn’t have international criminal syndicates that have an economy of a developed shadow country by itself!
Lasantha & Poddala cases are not solved. So I prefer you respect innocent until proven guilty view. The same way some suspect the government, a majority (including myself) also suspect the opposition and the LTTE. They had all to gain from those murder/assaults, more so than the government imho. Both UNP & the LTTE have demonstrated quite capable of such brutality over the years.
But I do think the police have failed in not solving those cases. But it was always like that regardless of the government in power. Bottom line is Sri Lanka being a poor nation, you have to expect a higher rate of crime than develop nations. Most people resort to crime purely out of desperation. Not because they do it for hobbies! Due to this fact we do have higher rape, murder, assault, robbery cases. So I disagree that it’s a problem with laws. We have a pretty harsh criminal justice system from what I understand. That is why the police are too stretched, combined with rampant corruption (mostly because we can’t afford to give them an adequate salary for the risks they take), they are not the most efficient. Add to this they had to aid in counter terrorist activities as well. Now I know how crass some cops are and I won’t defend some of them but again I do have a level of respect for their authority as opposed to many Colombo elite who would just buy them off if they could. Colombo elite are the ones who set bad examples to start with. Then they abuse the cops not realising their behavior is no better.
Again lifting the social conditions in this country is the answer! At least the army is being useful now hunting down the underworld. Like in any country the rich get away with most crimes, shame! But I have also seen some vicious criminals being justly identified and punished by the police force. I can boldly say that our police force is better than the Indian/Pakistan ones at least! The countries with nukes and a space program. Can you disagree with me there? It’s a 3rd world thing – not isolated to Sri Lanka only.
The reason I identified you as an extremist was because of unwarranted comparisons. You and I both know, even by the most far out UN and other INGO figures, statements, that Sri Lanka is not justified in being equated with what you said. If it was that bad UN peace keepers would be in the country. Before that India would be in the country. You may not realise this, but during the war India had a front row seat to what unfolded. They were monitoring more closely than anyone else. In fact we carried out the war with their supervision. And they surely were not going to let mass atrocities happen, which did NOT!
I’m gonna cut this short, so how about this Mr. Fernando? I will ask you one last thing. That is to prove what you said with some numbers. I would have done this myself but I really don’t have the time right now. But since you’re the one making willy nilly theatrical accusations, I reckon you should put the money where your mouth is.
Make a simple table. In one column have the Nazi regime, Stalin’s regime and Pol pot’s regime and add any other despots you feel inclined including some recent African conflicts like Ethiopia, Sudan and finally Sri Lanka. Next column have all the civilian casualty figures attributed to the STATE player as documented by reliable sources. UN, HRW is just fine but no impartial sources (like for instance don’t reference Tamilnet for Sri Lanka). And the 3rd column is the reference column. So myself and every other reader of this blog can verify the figures. Let’s see some numbers to see if I can agree with you. Am I being unreasonable? Thank you.
I do not agree with some UN, HRW figures either as they quote outlandish numbers with no proof but I just want to see even if those figures justify what you say!
Pres Bean, so you want to be cute, fine.. Why in the world would any sane security arrangement allow any protester to lurk in front of the president’s residence when he’s like the biggest target?
good observer, i don’t deny corruption, nepotism, abuse of power, etc. it’s a fact of the world. i observe enough to see that it is not a problem just isolated to sri lanka or it’s current administration.
where did the sunday leader lawyer protest other than in the courts? i was asking for an example where state forces crushed a peaceful protest. not an unidentified assault with a hand grenade which is a matter for the police to investigate. also in the court he is simply doing his job (getting paid) not protesting. anyone can call anyone a traitor. if some people see you as a traitor then they will express their sentiment. nothing wrong with that!
undergroundviews, while i agree with more wealth that a larger proportion may possibly go to the wealthy i have also seen people from very bleak backgrounds make it in sri lanka. there are the success stories from rags to riches. we live in a capitalist society so principally, it’s anyone’s game. who dares wins right? economic resurrection is always driven by the private sector, so it’s not the government that will be reaping the most benefits of such growth (other than tax).
Baseer Navid, Pakistan is doing so well now as opposed to Musharaf’s time don’t they? Did you know how corrupt the leaders were before he stepped in? US just shot it self in the foot by getting rid of him. Now the Taliban’s out of control and they’re facing defeat in Afghanistan. While I don’t approve of the way he came into power, I can see why he was compelled to do what he did. At least security wise the country was somewhat stable then.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gulag
1,053,829 people died in the GULAG from 1934 to 1953
approx 70 000 died in the last insurgency in the south and at least 70 000 (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/2405347.stm.) in an internal war in the north/East over last 3 decades. Soviets did not bomb their own cities as far as I know.
Approx half a million Tamils and Muslims are internally displaced due to 3 decades of war.
http://www.humanitarianinfo.org/sriLanka_hpsl/Files/Appeals%20and%20Funding/Appeals%20and%20Funding/AF00023_MYR_2009_Sri_Lanka_CHAP_SCREEN.pdf
Population of Soviet union in 1990 approx 300 million
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet_Union
Population in Sri lanka in 2009 approx 20 million
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sri_Lanka
Regardless, it would be absurd, in 2009, when one has the benefit of hindsight, through well documented cases accessible through the electronic media etc to allow things to escalate to the level that we can say this is like the Soviet union, or Darfur or Cambodia for that matter.
Also the justification that Sri lanka is “poor”. It has a higher GDP than India yet is ranked higher than India, using the failed state index (the higher value the more likely for the country to be a failed state http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Failed_state). Before Independence Sri lanka was one of the richest countries in Asia. Even now it is ranked higher in terms of level of development, than Egypt, Indonesia, India etc. using the UNDP human development index. http://hdr.undp.org/en/statistics/
Development and levels of education in Yugoslavia did not stop Srebenica for happening.
*correction GDP per capita
Observer (sorry I cannot call you by your real name),
Thank you for taking the trouble to express your views about my views. Despite not being able to agree with you, I do appreciate you taking trouble to engage yourself in a discussion despite your calling me an “extremist”. Unfortunately, Dayan Jayatilaka evaded the discussion.
You have two kinds of arguments – one of a factual nature and the other are in the nature of speculations based on political philosophies. First let me answer the factual ones.
You say that the 1978 Constitution was not changed because people did not want to change it. In your words: “Why is it that no political party that was in power took steps to reverse executive presidency so far? Because not enough people wanted it or was a priority.” Unfortunately, you are completely unaware of the history on hits matter. Chandrika Bandaranayake contested elections against the UNP and won them. One of her main promises in the election manifesto was to abolish Executive Presidency. Once in power, she understood that unlike in a system with checks and balances, this constitution provides enormous powers to abuse. The story of her abuse of power is well-recorded in Victor Ivans’ book “Chaura Rejina” (Bandit Queen). Will you say that her abuse of power was due to the war or because she was a ‘third world leader’. Yes, that third world argument is a fine one to get away from any responsibility. The leaders of the third world countries, you seem to assume, are not responsible for what they do and in fact everything happens simply because of the third world conditions.
The next person to promise the abolition of the Executive Presidency was President M. Rajapaksha. Here is the quote from the Mahinda Chinthanaya: “With the consensus of all, I expect to present a Constitution that will propose the abolition of the Executive Presidency and to provide solutions to other issues confronting the country. In the interim, I propose to present a Constitutional amendment through which the Executive President will be made answerable to the Parliament by virtue of holding such office. To endorse the responsibility that the President has to the Parliament, I will attend Parliament once a month.” (Ayyo, you don’t even seem to know the Mahinda Chinthanaya no.) He wrote it very clearly in his Mahinda Chinthanaya, but soon he too followed Chandrika Bandaranayake and the abuse of power has not become lesser. Again, a third world problem no?
Now, Ranil Wickremasinghe and several other leaders of the UNP openly and repeatedly mention in parliament and outside that if they come to power the first thing they will do is to abolish the Executive Presidency. The JVP is also of the same view.
Strangely, the LTTE was not worried about this problem because this is a problem affecting all Sri Lankans, Sinhalese, Tamils, Muslims and others. Being completely committed to separatism, Prabahakaran knew that if Sri Lanka were to become a more vibrant democracy, he would lose his argument for a separate state. His arguments on separate argument were based on mentioning various things which he called discriminations, which were in fact not specific problems specific only to Tamils, but many of these problems were shared commonly by the ordinary people of Sri Lanka. (By the way, there is one thing on which I agree with you, which is what you say about Sri Lanka’s elite. But the reason on which I find objection in relation to them is their lack of farsightedness to achieve the necessary constitutional changes which would have helped us to avoid the type of problems that we have gone through for four decades, beginning from JVP insurrection of 1970).
Anyway, factually your view about the agreement of political parties and of the people on the 1978 Constitution is completely wrong. Naturally, your perspective could have been very different if this part of the debate on the constitution was known to you.
Secondly, you say that at the time that I am complaining about the constitution, Sri Lanka was at war and that during the times of war, you say, heads of state are given more powers. The time that I mention as the beginning of the constitutional problem is 1972, completed by 1978. At that time, we were not at ‘war’. At the time, there was the beginning of a conflict and had there been farsighted political decisions we would not have even had the latter part of that conflict, which was indeed a very brutal war. In the discussions into the 1972 and 1978 constitutions, there were no discussions about greater powers to be given to lead a war. The discussion in 1972 was that some form of authoratasrianism was necessary to achieve economic development. That was how the coalition thought of it. In 1978 the argument that in order to usher a free market economy these constitutional changes were necessary. That JR J launched in 1978 was not against the LTTE but against the entire people of Sri Lanka. But I can see that your way of thinking and JR Js has one thing in common.
JR J believed that the rule of law institutions that we had in the country were an obstacle to introduce free market economy. You also seem to believed that the third world countries can ignore the establishment of rule of law institutions and democracy. We were a third world country before 1972 and despite of that we had better institutional framework than we have now. That was deliberately done away with.
The third issue regarding facts are about Sri Lanka’s police. Again, the problem of the Sri Lankan police you seem to think is that it is a third world police. Literature on the police crisis are plentiful. I can suggest one recent article by Snr. DIG(Rtd) Gamini Gunawardane about the state of Sri Lanka’s police.
“Owing to the fifth stage above, even the most junior police constable knows that people are not the primary client of the police, but that his top client really is the politician. Politician’s requirement always takes priority. Though the politician is supposed to be only a representative of the people, the peoples’ requirement came only after his requirement.”
You may read the full article at http://sinhale.wordpress.com/2009/09/07/what-is-wrong-with-the-police/
In 2001 the Sri Lankan parliament with near uninamity agreed that the problem of several vital institutions were due to politicization, which happened due to the 1978 Constitution. Accordingly the 17th Amendment to the Consitution was passed. The National Police Commission was later appointed and it was making significant progress in rebuilding the system. Then the Executive President abolished it when it was incompatible with the absolute power that he had. Again, this was not just a third world problem. It was a problem that could have been solved if there was the will to abandon the 1978 Consitution. It would be stupid to say that we would have had a perfect institution without at corruption. We are not in a discussion about perfection but about relative possibilities which are within our means. You can keep on dreaming about a perfect world that will come when there is no more third world. I am talking about possibilities that can be achieved while we are progressing towards better economic conditions.
While we are on the third world issue, let me give you two examples. Even in the late 1980s, South Korea was under a military dictatorship with enormous forms of repression and also relatively poor. However, in the ‘90s there were radical democratic reforms that dismantled the absolute powers of the military and created a democratic system based on rule of law. Today, that third world country has progressed so much and it cannot any longer be called a third world country. Hong Kong, before 1974, had a situation regarding rule of law which is comparable to our situation before 1970s. A backward rule of law system but still not dictatorial, repressive system. In 1974 radical reforms were brought in the law enforcement by the establishment of the Independent Commission Against Commission (ICAC). Within a short time the rule of law system was strenghthend by the drastic reduction of corruption. In the years to come, it also became economically much more advanced.
This brings us to the crux of the problems you have discussed about checks and balances. You say that despite of checks and balances, there are many problems in countries which do have such checks and balances. As you say, the United States went to war with Iraq despite of checks and balances. Many more similar examples can be given. It was never been argued that checks and balances create perfection. It only argues that checks and balances create improvements and that the absence of them makes power absolutely corrupt. Let’s take the situation of a country that has a more advanced medical system. In that country, too, still many people will die from preventable disease and still that country can be subjected to new epidemics. From that does it follow that there is no difference between a country that has developed an advanced medical system from a country that has not. Don’t you think that it is simply too stupid to take such a position? This is exactly what you have done regarding system with checks and balances and those who have lost them.
If you believe that the constitutions and the law have had nothing to do with human progress, then on that issue there is nothing more that can be discussed. I believe that the constitutions and law have had so much to do with human progress, including economic progress. This is not to say that it is only law and constitutions that matter.
Finally, as for your request of a table, again it is based on an assumption you have about the way repression can be assessed. If you ask somebody in the ‘40s about statistics from Stalin’s repression, you wouldn’t have had very much. It was after the famous speech of Kruschev in 1956 that there was more freedom to find out details of the repression and it took many more decades to discover the extent of the damage. In fact, people like Solzhenitsyn were of the view that it will take much more time to grasp the damage that took place during this time.
Put this same argument in a different way. If you take various kind of atrocities like disappearences and tortures etc. in Burma, let us say since the ‘70s, the actual atrocities will be much less than in Sri Lanka during the same time. For example, they did not have 30,000 disappearences as it happened in the south of Sri Lanka. However, from the point of view of the extent of repression, Burma during these years up to now is more worse. What creates their repression is the complete absence of any kind of institutional protection.
The same thing can be said about Cambodia since the ‘90s. The actual extent of atrocities, such as extrajudicial killings, is much less than in Sri Lank just going by the known facts. Yet, the repression in Cambodia is much worse, judging by the extent of institutional protection.
My argument about repression in Sri Lanka was that we have lost much of what we even had by way of institutional protection. The type of institutional protection we have now is not one of a basic rule of law system. Instead, we have abandoned that system in a very fundamental way. We are now on the side of countries which are worse from the point of view of institutional protection.
I have the same problem as you about space. It has already been a long comment from the point of view of space available. However, I intend to deal with these issues at even greater length and publish elsewhere shortly. I hope, meanwhile, you will get your facts correct. But as for your own assumptions about the world and when it will be perfect and about the third world, well you are entitled to hold whichever view that you wish to hold. That’s no problem for me.
Mr. Observer:
You say that you don’t know the law, which means you don’t know the laws that have been lost. Mr. Fernando has been talking about the way the lawlessness came about in Sri Lanka. You write without even understanding what you are writing about. That’s a pity.
Observer – one question you asked clearly shows the problem with Sri Lanka’s democracy. You asked: “Why in the world would any sane security arrangement allow any protester to lurk in front of the president’s residence when he’s like the biggest target?”
A sane security arrangement would be able to distinguish between peaceful protest and a threat to peace, between dissent and treason.
A less sane arrangement would imprison journalists for being critical of the government, lock up camp doctors who speak too frankly about the conduct of the army, and have astrologers investigated by the police when their predictions don’t meet with presidential approval.
Anyway, what’s the point of listening to astrologers if you’re going to force them to give you only good news?
Atheist…what I meant when I called ‘Sri Lanka’ the land of the deaf, dumb and blind was, that most Sri Lankans have eyes…but can’t see…others have ears…but don’t listen…and some have mouths but only speak to defend racism…what a funny country we live in…
Atheist…ever come across the line”see no evil, hear no evil, speak no evil?”
In the western world the phrase is often used to refer to those who deal with impropriety by looking the other way, refusing to acknowledge it, or feigning ignorance.
Sadly…Sri Lanka has an abundance of people like this.
“There are none so blind as those who *will* not see.”
(proverb traced to 1546 John Heywood, in 1738, used by Jonathan Swift in his ‘Polite Conversation)
I suspect our delusions, and the things we blind ourselves to, our the things that do our own lives and public life the most damage!
correction
I suspect our delusions, and the things we blind ourselves to, ARE the things that do our own lives and public life the most damage!
Mr. Fernando, no need to be apologetic, I prefer to be anonymous. Do you think politicians always keep their promises? No! That’s why they’re good politicians. They break promises like the break wind and they know how to talk! It’s a universal phenomenon. It’s up to the people to make sure they’re punished for significant deviation from their said promises. Fool me once shame on you.. blah blah, that line Bush stuffed up famously. I know Chandrika was very very corrupt as opposed to all other presidents who were somewhat corrupt. MR included – sounds too good to be true otherwise. I get that.
In all fairness, when MR came to power he had other more pressing issues. At the time issue of executive presidency wasn’t the biggest concern for me either but an impending all out war. In his defense he fared well with that challenge presented having exhausted all other options with the benefit of hind sight to say so. Now that challenge is not completely over and he hasn’t even finished a 1st term yet. So isn’t it too early to come to conclusions in all fairness yet? I’ll leave it at that and honestly don’t know if he will stick to it. For instance Obama came into power on the platform he will close Guantanamo – process detainees and pull out of Iraq, none of which has been completely done yet due to inherent complexities yet we can’t come to a decisive conclusion yet. That’s politics. But if we all get so upset over “some” broken promises like in relationships then we won’t have a political system in this world right?
About the 1970s stuff I wasn’t even born then so I shall refrain from counter arguing that period as I have limited knowledge. I am very aware of the mistakes made as a nation during that period and fully accept some of the grief we have experience as a result of that even though “my generation” was not responsible for that shortsightedness. I am more concerned about the present and the future. In fact I never set to deny genuine mistakes made by Sri Lankans. I just wanted to point out the callousness of your claims without adequate factual and relevant linkage. Most of all the misinterpretation of a legitimate war surrounding conditions as state oppression. By your argument any war is state oppression be it their own citizens or other statesmen. By your reasoning we can call US, UK and the coalition as a Stalinist Gulag regime looking at the civilian casualty and disappearance figures in Iraq and Afghanistan alone. Not to mention the sordid torture tales.
About the availability of the information, that’s a load of crap to put it politely. We live in the information age. Not in the days there wasn’t even in the Internet (in a tangible way) or satellite phones. We have census statistics (even done by the LTTE), we can count the survivors, we apply simple math to know exactly know how many perished without needing to look for mass graves. We should only worry about mass graves if those numbers don’t add up. Despite journos being banned for the fair reason being a hot zone, EU members were in constant touch with the LTTE at all times via satellite communication. So let’s not get so dramatic. Times are different! Unlike the sorry episodes you’d like to compare Sri Lanka to, those places did not have the hawkish eyes of international media extrapolating casualty figures only later to be retracted by a very pervasive UN over the shoulders at all times. So I can assure you Sri Lanka was not capable of carrying out any atrocities. Especially when the world’s highest resolution satellites were beaming live images of the no fire zone to the Pentagon. I at least hope they had their eyes there as the top cop of the world.
With active insurgencies you cannot account accurately for disappearances. In Iraq, Afghanistan a person is one day a civilian next day a combatant. When he’s killed in action he’s listed as a “dead civilian” or “disappeared”. That’s the new reality in counter insurgency war and I know that a lot of disappearances you talk about are really LTTE supporters who voluntarily disappear to become combatants or activate as suicide bombers.
S, inaccurate figures. That 70,000 number is a number floating due to the whole conflict. It is attributed to all parties and includes COMBATANTS – which constitutes the majority of that number! I asked civilian casualties attributed to the STATE player. Where did you get the 70,000 for JVP?? That is laughable at best. Reference please. Again a lot of them were armed combatants attacking state institutions and killing innocent people. So most of who died during that episode deserved to die as legitimate combatants including one of my own uncles. Mind you a lot of countries (especially in Asia) went through socialist revolutions and counter revolutions. You may not know but at the height of the cold war even in US there was a very real socialist paranoia and witch hunt sans the Sri Lankan episode’s brutality. If you pull numbers like that then US is 100 Gulags, if you count the number of people died during its conflicts throughout history! Not the whole history but just starting from Vietnam, I’ll give a concession for the world wars. How can the world prevent mass atrocities, when the world army – NATO goes to war on false intelligence? Who’s committing basic atrocities? Like I said while India had a very close eye during the conflict, US also monitored independently and obtained intelligence from India as well. They knew exactly what went on. And it wasn’t anything like you all put out to be.
Underground views, Ok do you think a bunch of skin head protestors (objecting Obama) will get to protest in the lawn of the white house? No! Do you think citizens who support the mudjhadine will get to protest at the white house about the war in Afghanistan? No. Sure some get to protest, after extensive screening and with a vast degree of control on their behavior, literally at gun point by the snipers and secret service all around them. They might as well protest somewhere else. I can assure you that US president has a more thorough security arrangement than MR. Let’s face it both presidents are high risk targets as they were/are both involved in active engagements.
Observer
Most people in my country celebrate the fact that we were able to defeat General Musharraf. I am sorry to see anybody admiring a dictator. You have mentioned the period of your birth therefore I will not be very harsh on you. Dictatorships are terrible things. Those of us who have lived through one work very hard to see that such dictators go. The defeat of dictators is not the end of everything. All the problems created by 32 years of dictatorship by the military in my country since independence will be there for a long time. What dictators destroy it is difficult for others to build.
In our struggle for democracy one strong cornerstone now is the judgment of the chief justice who was returned to his post to the effect that no head of state in the future will have any power to suspend the constitution. The struggle to build constitutions with real safeguards is a very difficult task. It is easy to undo them. Then all the systems of protection disappears.
Corruption is a problem but corruption thrives when there are dictatorships. Within a democracy there is a possibility of fighting against it. The new chief justice has made very strict rules regarding monitoring of corruption by judges and in the legal process. In some countries there are great achievements of controlling corruption. There are people who don’t have to pay any money to get a job done by a government agency or a law enforcement agency. They don’t have to give favours to anyone in order to get a job if the jobs are available and if they are qualified. So given the democracy there is a chance to fight against corruption.
I hope in your life you will see a better Sri Lanka. As outsiders we used to envy your country. We thought it would be one of the great examples that demonstrate the possibility of rule of law, democracy and economic develop taking place at the same time. Now we are sad no doubt. But we will continue to hope that the younger generation of Sri Lanka will not repeat the mistakes of their leaders as is happening now. I hope you country will offer you a better place with the freedoms and friendships that you deserve.
@ Observer You said: “Ok do you think a bunch of skin head protestors (objecting Obama) will get to protest in the lawn of the white house? No! Do you think citizens who support the mudjhadine will get to protest at the white house about the war in Afghanistan? No. ”
Funny you should say that. A quick search on google shows numerous protests, of all sizes, about all sorts of issues, in front of the White House. There was one where people threw shoes at an inflated George Bush, to protest his wars. One where thousands of people marched from the White House to the Capitol, against the war in Iraq (where people were only arrested when they climbed barricades at the Capitol). The US has a strong tradition of free speech and protest inside its borders.
You added: “Sure some get to protest, after extensive screening and with a vast degree of control on their behavior, literally at gun point by the snipers and secret service all around them. They might as well protest somewhere else. I can assure you that US president has a more thorough security arrangement than MR.”
I’ve seen US presidential security abroad – it seems over the top, until you realise how many assassinations and attempts there have been on the lives of US presidents, and how many people really really dislike the US.
But you should not confuse that with their approach to the freedom to peaceful protest. There are many things in America that should not be imitated – but their freedom of speech and freedom to protest is a good thing that Sri Lanka would do well to copy.
It hasn’t led to the collapse of the USA, has it? Would it really destroy Sri Lanka?
President Bean,
You and the crew have become expert in quoting clichés because, I suspect, creativity is not your forte. Excessive quoting is an indication that the writer is unable to breakdown an idea/concept, as he/she does not understand the very basics of what he/she professes to know.
Resorting to unnecessary quotations and derogatory comments, in my opinion, is often used as a get out of jail card by fraudulent “intellectuals”; however, I am not that generous: no free pass for you and the crew – not even a day pass!
As for the proverb the “three wise monkeys” – probably originating in China or Japan – it is taught to every child in Kindergarten. Perhaps you and the crew were never exposed to Kindergarten basics?
As I understand, according to you, this proverb is used in the West under a different context, namely to denounce moral apathy. My, my, if you know at least a tiny bit about the world, you will find out very quickly that this proverb is frequently used among people of all cultures. Besides moral apathy, the “three wise monkeys” also symbolize the dangers of: gossip, propaganda, rumour mongering and character assassination. Only the morally apathetic could engage in the said behaviour.
The next time, please, wow us with something creative – no quoting!
Ciao!
Isn’t this supposed to be a discussion about repression? Rather than, say, the early education of fellow posters…
Just wondering…
Dear Atheist…to find out more about gossip, propaganda, rumour mongering and character assassination, please watch Rupavahini and ITN, listen to Hudson Samarasinghe every morning at 7am on SLBC and read the Daily Noise and Sunday Observer. But on the other hand if you can put up with different points of view…check out http://www.groundviews.org
Undergroundview,
Undergroundview said: “Isn’t this supposed to be a discussion about repression? Rather than, say, the early education of fellow posters… “
A note to the underground man/woman: early childhood education is the most important phase in one’s life. In, my experience, people who were not indoctrinated with religion and race at an early age, very often, grow up to care about their fellow human beings and the environment. Certainly, the discussion on repression can lead to the exploration of childhood experiences, can it not?
Sure, I deviated – and I am still deviating – from the original discussion, but so are you and the others. What’s your beef with me questioning someone’s early education based on their one-sided interpretation of a parable?
Relax…the world belongs to us all!
President Bean,
How can anyone expect much from the state – owned print media as represented by the Daily News, Thinakaran and Dinamina and the Sunday Observer. The same applies to state television such as Rupavahini and ITN.
As for Hudson Silva, he is any nincompoop’s Rush Limbaugh!
Unfortunately, the supposedly alternative media in Sri-Lanka also represents the interests of only a select few. There is nothing “alternative” about any media that propagandizes under the pretext of fighting for human rights. Both the state and the “civil society” have much to learn about equal rights and justice.
At least the state media is not a devil in disguise; however – whether in disguise or not – both devils ultimately do the same damage to society and the nation.
I suppose most people simply choose their devil. I have, for my part, rejected them both.
My admiration for devils does not extend beyond Halloween!
Correction: As for Hudson Samarasinghe, he is any nincompoop’s Rush Limbaugh!
Sorry……. Hudson Silva
Machang Atheist…how would you rate ‘Groundviews?’
President Bean,
President Bean said: “Machang Atheist…how would you rate ‘Groundviews?’”
Sinna thangachi President Bean…are you taking a survey?
If not, I think you may be asking me a trick question. It’s like someone asking you, “Do I look fat in these jeans?”
Hasta Luego punchi nangi President Bean!