A Kunanayakam by any other name?
Repost This Article
Mercenaries with misplaced consciences appear to be leading Sri Lanka’s latest band of apologists. Seldom does a hired hand leave such a damning trail as does Tamara Kunanayakam, Ambassador/Permanent Representative of Sri Lanka to the United Nations Office at Geneva and other International Organizations in Switzerland.
During the General Debate under Item 2 at the 18th Session of the United Nations Human Rights Council on 12 September 2011, H.E. Kunanayakam criticized the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, Navi Pillay for her apparent ‘partiality’.[1] One is at a loss to comprehend what ‘partiality’ the Ambassador alludes to, except perhaps the fervency in which the High Commissioner has thus far discharged her mandate. In any event, there is no doubt that the High Commissioner will wear this curious brand like a badge of honour. The Ambassador goes on to state:
I must also observe that it appears that the High Commissioner does not have the will to even acknowledge a paradigm shift in the policy of the Government of Sri Lanka. In her statement, she treats the lifting of emergency regulations so lightly and fails to acknowledge that they are withdrawn in their entirety. Sri Lanka observes that the High Commissioner’s position on the withdrawal of emergency misleads the Council with regard to the true legal position.
In conclusion, Madam President, it has to be appreciated that each Member State of this Council does recognize the need to have a security related legislation, and it has to be noted that Sri Lanka’s only existing legislation as it stands today is less stringent than the modern legislations of some other countries, which provide for the most stringent of measures in the treatment of terrorism.
Any government apologist would be expected to make the point that emergency has been lifted and that normalcy has been restored in the country. In other words, it is perfectly safe to hold the Commonwealth Games in Sri Lanka. Yet the Prevention of Terrorism Act (PTA) continues to be enforced—a negligible detail. Not surprisingly, the Ambassador fails to mention that the government has also introduced new regulations—just in case broad powers of search and seizure; detention without indictment for a period of up to eighteen months; admission of confessions in police custody as evidence; and the reversal of the presumption of innocence, all provided for under the PTA, are not enough to combat terrorism in the current context. The Government of Sri Lanka is obviously eager to eat the cake and have it—perhaps even place it under preventive detention. Despite signalling to the international community that normalcy has been restored, the government wishes to keep the anti-terror trick up its proverbial sleeve. The PTA and the additional regulations will no doubt be instrumental when the government looks to suppress dissenting voices in the future.
Returning to H.E. Kunanayakam, one is a Google search away from stumbling upon a delicious piece of irony. The Ambassador has commented on emergency and the PTA before. In fact, she appears to be remarkably proficient in analyzing the far-reaching consequences of the PTA, the same piece of security related legislation she calls ‘less stringent than the modern legislations of some other countries’. Back in February 1987, when the current UN Human Rights Council was called the Commission on Human Rights, and current presidents were called defenders of human rights, H.E. Kunanayakam launched a blistering assault on the emergency regime in Sri Lanka.[2] In an astonishingly lucid account of the dangers of anti-terror laws such as the PTA, she observed:
The Prevention of Terrorism Act and Emergency Regulations have removed most of the legal safeguards prescribed under the International Covenants on Human Rights. Prolonged incommunicado detention without trial is the norm. The whereabouts of people arrested and detained are not made known to relatives. Lawyers and relatives have no access to detainees in most cases.
Most of the arrests, the victims of which, by and large, are Tamils, are effected under the Prevention of Terrorism Act and Emergency Regulations. It may he noted that the Prevention of Terrorism Act has been described by the International Commission of Jurists as an ugly blot on the statute book of any civilised country. Sri Lanka has been ruled by the present government under a state of emergency for most of its life since 1977.
[I]t is in this context that many substantiated cases of torture and deaths in custody have been reported, so much so that the Special Rapporteur on Torture has expressed great concern [in] his report referring to Sri Lanka. The suspension of important legal safeguards under the Prevention of Terrorism Act and Emergency Regulations have created conditions conducive to the practice of torture.
Mr. Chairman, no longer can the government of Sri Lanka divert the attention of those genuinely concerned by the human rights situation in that country by references to separatism and terrorism. It must, as we said earlier, address itself to the root causes that have given rise to violence and violations that characterise Sri Lankan society today.
These sentiments ring eerily true almost 25 years later. Though little has changed as far as the predicament of those affected by emergency laws and the PTA are concerned, the voices that spoke on their behalf have now abandoned them.
There is a bitter lesson to be learned from this metamorphosis. Human rights defenders of today may return as government apologists tomorrow. This is not to say that the human rights community of Sri Lanka is packed with wolves in sheep’s clothing. Yet the community must be prepared to expose purely agenda-driven activism. The embarrassing contradiction that has befallen the Ambassador confirms the intuition that ‘human rights’ is not merely a set of rules, but a set of convictions; it is a calling that must be jealously guarded against usurpation by self-serving imposters. It is, ultimately, an enterprise that must proudly welcome the accusation of partiality.
[1] http://www.mea.gov.lk/index.php/en/media/3013-statement-by-he-tamara-kunanayakam-ambassadorpermanent-representative-of-sri-lanka-during-the-general-debate-under-item-2-at-the-18th-session-of-the-united-nations-human-rights-council-12-september-2011-geneva.
[2] http://www.srilankabrief.org/2011/08/tamara-kunanayakam-sl-ambassader-to.html.
Thamarai, thank you for doing this great service to our society.
Dear Thamarai,
You obviously don’t understand the role of an ambassador.
While you do an excellent personal attack on Her Excellency you fail to examine the credibility of her argument that ” the [apparent partiality] of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, Navi Pillay”. You have provided nothing to assert otherwise.
While you might be correct that H.E has changed her tune for purely personal benefit, had it occurred to you that her stance in 1987 and her stance in 2011 might have changed due to all the happenings that have occurred during (24 years). One such reason might be that countries such as the USA and the UK used Sri Lanka’s PTA as a model for their anti terrorism laws post 9-11.
H.E argued that other countries have more stringent anti-terror legislation than Sri Lanka does, while the UN High Commissioner chose to single out Sri Lanka (Omar Khadr, Canadian 15 year old arrested, detained, tortured at Guantanamo for over 4 years without charge). Also, though many a critic has argued otherwise, it is true that lifting the Emergency regulation (even with the introduction of new regulations under the PTA) did have a positive legal effect as far as civil rights are concerned (including shifting the oversight over the detention of suspects from the military to the civilian police).
Thamarai, I will give you one point though, that is for identifying though subconsciously that “the human rights community of Sri Lanka is packed with wolves in sheep’s clothing” and that most are acting” purely [on]agenda-driven activism”. They rarely go to the courts or police or make use of other mechanisms like the Grama Sevaka but make foreign embassies their first point of complaint, no doubt rewarded with $$ and hamburgers.
How GS and police systems are politicised is only too well-known.
When our National Human Rights Commission (degraded to observer status 3/4 years ago) starts functioning things should be easier. As the Periodic Review is coming up the government is trying to make the NHRI a healthy organ. There are 15 Full members in Asia Pacific Forum and two Associate members who don’t abide by Paris principles:
Human rights Commissions of Sri Lanka and Maldives(Maldives is just out of a dictator’s 30-yr rule).
By the way – Fiji is under military rule(Northeast Sri Lanka has been under army of occupation from 1961 Satyagraha)
http://www.srilankaguardian.org/2011/09/sri-lanka-and-fiji-ghost-human-rights.html
Sri Lanka and Fiji: Ghost Human Rights Commissions, 20 September 2011
”‘’The history of socio-political instability in Sri Lanka and Fiji combined with the absence of a regional human rights institution or treaty in the Asia Pacific region enhance the urgency for effective and legitimate NHRIs in these countries.”
Hopefully then Sri Lankans will not have to run to foreign high commissions
How shameless some people are when they turn coats!!
Too many Sri Lankans we need to be harsh on:
http://colombotelegraph.com/
Wikileaks: Mahinda Rajapaksa is a “christian” – says Archbishop
This current regime is a difficult place for an educated intellectual. Furthermore, it is even a harder place for a Tamil woman interested in human or minority rights. But unlike the rest of us who sit by the side and bark, this lady is working to make a change, to improve the situation from within. Neither she nor many of the others working on the diplomatic front are hard pressed for employment. They were in influential positions in the international arena and could probably leave for better pastures like most of us do. So to insult them and call them apologists is not only cowardly but also inconsiderate. Your unconstructive, trite and under-the-belt criticism just smacks of vileness and viciousness. Have you always maintained exactly the same ideas for 25 years? If you have then you are not thinking. Consistency, they say, is the last refuge of the unimaginative.
i must say i wholly agree with your sentiments.
Chaminda,
If I had only known this earlier! Damm! Instead of trying to follow the middle path and the 10 commandmants all these years I should have just been imaginative! If nothing else, inconsistency is a whole lot more fun in’it?
I was hoping that this H.E. Kunanayakam would step up to the plate and make a difference but alas, that was not to be. The inoculation by Dr. Jayatilleke was a grand success. There is nothing more “vile and vicious” than when one contributes to the maintenance of oppressive structures of tyranny!
There is nothing more “vile and vicious” than when one contributes to the maintenance of oppressive structures of tyranny!
An observation 30 years too late to save the children of the Tamil peasantry!!!
Chaminda
1.Please read the whole article.
a.PTA is well and alive. Furthermore we’ve been reading in the newspapers, new laws have been made. Many well-respected SriLankans have written that ”lifting emergency laws” has made no difference.
b. the ambassador has changed her opinion about PTA and hence she sees ”partiality” in UNHRC Chief.
3.Carrier diplomats die to be in the diplomatic front.
Is there a better pasture than UN Geneva for a carrier diplomat?
But is Tamara Kunanayagam really making a change from within? I can understand the fact that you silently try to make a change without antagonizing those in power, but is that possible with the MR family?
Went to Jaffna recently and saw that on average there is 3 military structures (sentry point, camp, etc) per km in the Vanni. On one of the islands the army stops water bowsers that are taking water for people and take water for their own use. Government officials are complaining silently but nothing in the sinhala and English media.
The situation is still heavily militarized in the Northeast. Tamils can’t really organise themselves without permission from the military in the Northeast. People might remember the attack on the TNA election candidates meeting by the SL Army.
So what change is Tamara Kunanayagam making silently or otherwise?
MR can be relied on to protect the Sinhalese:
25 yrs ago he was fighting for the human rights of Sinhalese.
He refuses to publish Udalagama report – Sinhalese armed forces will be revealed as perpetrators.
Kadirgamar’s case ….. not legally finalised.
Refusal to investigate hundreds of abductions and murders in 2006/7/8 ??
contd
As parts of Northeast Sri Lanka have been under bombing and shelling he was compensating Sinhalese for LTTE attacks.
He even prevents aid agents from helping Tamil IDPs.
Oops, Muslim IDPs(ejected out of Jaffna by LTTE) have been kept as ”exhibits” in Puttalam without letting them resettle in Jaffna which has been under the control of the army for well over 15 years.
There is just one word to describe people like Tamara Kunanayakam.Quisling.
The term was coined by the British newspaper The Times in an editorial published on 19 April 1940, entitled “Quislings everywhere” after the Norwegian Vidkun Quisling, who assisted Nazi Germany as it conquered his own country so that he could rule the collaborationist Norwegian government himself. The Daily Mail picked up the term four days later, and the BBC then brought it into common use internationally.The Times’ editorial asserted: “To writers, the word Quisling is a gift from the gods. If they had been ordered to invent a new word for traitor…they could hardly have hit upon a more brilliant combination of letters.
[Edited out]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quisling
When the Brits ruled Lanka we had no shortage of Quislings!!
Dear PresiDunce,
“There is just one word to describe people like Tamara Kunanayakam.Quisling.”
Once more Groundviews is spellbound by such incisive analysis. As the reigning intellectual heavyweight on this site, can you educate us what is the word to describe somebody like V. Prabakaran or Mr Pottu Amman who were responsible for killing thousands of fellow Tamils yet are lauded as heroes?
@ wijayapala
To those whom they fought against, V. Prabakaran and Mr Pottu Amman were terrorists.But for those whom they fought on behalf of, they were heroes and liberation fighters.
Now wijayapala, what is the word to describe the 2 brothers of the state who were responsible for “zero casualties” in a “humanitarian operation?”
Ms Tamara Kunanayakam made representations to the UN Commission on Human Rights in 1987 as an interventionist & member of the World Student Christian Federation.
She was member of a group of intervensionists.
http://tamilnation.co/unitednations/uncom87.htm#tamara%20%20
We should not be unfair in criticising Ambassador Kunanayakam. After all she is representing the Government of Sri Lanka headed by H.E. Mahinda Rajapakse. She knows very well that Mahinda Rajapakse was a champion of human rights during the late 1980s when he was in the forefront among those who were taking the then government to task for the human rights violations such as torture, abductions, extra-judicial killings and disappearances of persons that were rampant then when the JVP was facing the music at the hands of the then government. His Excellency was detected at the Colombo airport carrying photos of the victims of the atrocities of the then government. Such a Mahinda is today at the apex of a regime that is facing charges of human rights violations and war crimes at the national and international level. So why cannot Ambassador Kunanayakam who championed human rights causes then turn turtle and become the defender of the doings of Mahinda and Co. Let us be fair by the lady and let her sing for her supper.
Will Groundviews let the readers see the truth please?
This is true even today – nothing has changed except Tamara Gunanayagam’s view (-some SriLankans including SWRD Bandaranaike changed from Christianity to Buddhism when they entered political life)
Intervention by Miss Tamara Kunanayakam, World Student Christian Federation, UN Human Rights Commission, 23/2/1987,
I speak on behalf of the World Student Christian Federation, a non-governmental organisation with movements in more than 90 countries throughout the world.
It is increasingly recognised in reports of the Commission ‘s monitoring bodies in respect of detention, torture, enforced disappearances and summary executions, that these violations are usually part of a systematic pattern, and such systematic violations of human rights usually betray structural root causes which need to be addressed before the violations will disappear. For example, the Report of the Working Group on Enforced or Involuntary Disappearances (E/CN. 4/1987/15/Add.], paragraph 43) stated with regard to Peru that “it is not feasible to divorce the issue of disappearance completely from related violations of human rig/Its or from the socio-political processes that have engendered them
He concludes that ‘only when the structural factors that contributed to the spiral of terror and counter-terror are properly dealt with, can there he any hope of preventing a recurrence of the excesses of the past. The report of the Special Rapporteur on Torture (E/CN.4/]987/13, para.5) states that ‘torture almost invariably takes place in a political context, ” and that ”victims of torture are very often opponents of the government in power.
These reports show that the inter-related violations such as torture, disappearances and summary executions are manifestations of deeper structural realities. Mr Chairman, it is within this wider context identified by the Special Rapporteurs that we wish to deal with tile violations of human rights that occur in Sri Lanka. Our case is that the government of Sri Lanka should address itself to the underlying causes if it is genuine/v commuted to the restoration of human rig/Its in that country.
The distinguished delegate of Norway yesterday (24/2/8 7) said “Enforced and involuntary disappearances and torture of persons seem to be used as convenient tactics for governments suppressing opponents and espousing a policy of stifling dissent often on the grounds of national security or with reference to the national integrity and sovereignty.” This is exactly the practice prevailing in Sri Lanka today, in the context of the government’s failure to address itself to the legitimate grievances of the Tamil people stemming from socio-economic and political causes.
There is incontrovertible evidence that compared to previous years, larger numbers of people have been arrested in 1986, very often on a mass scale, and detained for prolonged periods. A civil rights monitoring group in Sri Lanka estimates that the total number taken into custody during 1986 to be in the region of 14,000 persons. Those arrested are detained not in normal detention centres but in army camps located in various parts of the country under degrading conditions.
Most of the arrests, the victims of which, by and large, are Tamils, are effected under the Prevention of Terrorism Act and Emergency Regulations. It may he noted that the Prevention of Terrorism Act has been described by the International Commission of Jurists as an ugly blot on the statute hook of any civilised country. Sri Lanka has been ruled by the present government under a state of emergency for most of its life since 1977.
The Prevention of Terrorism Act authorises detention up to a period of 18 months and Emergency Regulations for an unlimited period. Yesterday (24/2/87) the Sri Lankan delegate sought to argue that unlimited detention is not possible under Emergency Regulations because orders under a State of Emergency can legally last only for a month.
The fact of the matter is that the State of Emergency has been renewed every month without interruption during the last several years thus enabling detention of persons for unlimited periods. The Committee for Monitoring Cessation of Hostilities appointed by the government itself in its report dated 17 January, 1986 stated that “Those held under the Prevention of Terrorism Act for more than 18 months are served with detention orders under Emergency Regulations which authorise unlimited detention.”
For all practical purposes there is no prospect of judicial review of detention of persons whether under the Prevention of Terrorism Act or Emergency Regulations. Mr Chairman, yesterday (24/2/87) the Sri Lankan delegate sought to impress this Commission about the remedy available by way of habeas corpus applications. This remedy in actual practice has proved ineffective and in most cases unavailable. In this connection the President of the Law Society Sri Lanka has said ”Since it is a tedious legal process which entails inordinate delays, a Habeas Corpus application does not serve the intended purpose. Quite a large number of applications in respect of persons about whom nothing is known after arrest, is still pending in the Appeal Court.” (Island, 20 January, 1986).
The Sri Lankan delegate also claimed yesterday, that detainees or their relatives have the right to make representations to an Advisory Board appointed by the President. A delegation of the UK Parliamentary Human Rights Group which visited Sri Lanka in February 1985 stated, “The problem is that it frequently takes several months for tile parent’s or mother’s letter requesting a review to reach the Advisory Board via the Ministry of Defence. And, once the Board has made its recommendation, it takes several more months before the Ministry of Defence acts upon it.”
The Prevention of Terrorism Act and Emergency Regulations have removed most of the legal safeguards prescribed under the International Covenants on Human Rights. Prolonged incommunicado detention without trial is the norm. The whereabouts of people arrested and detained are not made known to relatives. Lawyers and relatives have no access to detainees in most cases.
Mr Chairman, it is in this context that many substantiated cases of torture and deaths in custody have been reported, so much so that the Special Rapporteur on Torture has expressed great concern his report referring to Sri Lanka. The suspension of important legal safeguards under the Prevention of Terrorism Act and Emergency Regulations have created conditions conducive to the practice of torture.
Another new but reprehensible development reported during1986 has been the use of detainees as hostages and/or human shields during military operations by security forces.
There is also substantial evidence to indicate that over a thousand persons have disappeared or gone missing after being taken into custody. Besides the well documented Amnesty International Report on Disappearances, dated September 1986, the UN Working Group also has reported an in increasing number of disappearances.
The current report before this Commission by the Special Rapporteur refers to 321 outstanding cases of disappearances transmitted to the Sri Lanka government of which it was able to provide clarification in only 5 cases. By an standards this is unacceptable.
Mr.Chairman, while the violations of human rights to which we have adverted occur in the context of a continuing ethnic conflict, there is increasing evidence that wider sections of the whole Sri Lanka population, including those belonging to the Sinhala community, are becoming victims of similar violations. And very often the victims have been members of a wide range of opposition groups including members of some political parties, trade unions, women, student and human rights organisations.
Referring to the situation in south Sri Lanka, the Campaign for the Release of Political Prisoners (CROPP) an organisation based mainly in South Sri Lanka and whose leadership by and large belong to the Sinhala community, in recent statement said -
Reports coming in from those close to arrested persons reveal that tactics of arrest and detention long associated with repressive regimes in Latin America and in Asia. in the Philippines wider the Marcos government, have been put into practice in Sri Lanka:
* people are followed and picked up from the street. from public transport. in unmarked vehicles by persons in civil clothes;
* houses and boarding houses are raided at night:
* torches are flashed into the faces of suspects to blind’ them and prevent identification;
* private homes and offices are used as places of detention and interrogation
* families are never informed as to the cause of arrest; deliberate deception is also resorted to, to prevent families pursuing inquiries.”
The same organisation also expressed its concern that “powers of arbitrary arrest and detention arrogated by the State are being increasingly used to silence its political opponents and to stifle popular protest against the regime.”
Mr Chairman, it should thus be recognised that these violations in the South are also occurring in a broader socio-political context, denial of basic trade union and democratic rights. Pickets, demonstrations and strikes have often been banned under Emergency Regulations, and when they had taken place those workers who participated have been summarily dismissed from employment. For instance, when the Bank Employees decided to take industrial action in the form of a ‘work to rule’ campaign, Emergency Regulations were promulgated declaring banking and associated activities Essential Services, all industrial action made illegal, the entire leadership of the Bank Employees Union summarily dismissed and the Union’s assets made liable to confiscation. In addition, the civic rights of the leaders of the Bank Union were made liable to be deprived.
In the political arena, the right of the people to participate in the political processes by means of regular elections has been denied since 1977, by the extension of the life of parliament without a general election. In place of a general election, a referendum was held under a State of Emergency.
The Parliamentary Elections Commissioner in a recent report has catalogued substantial electoral malpractices as having taken place during this referendum. In the absence of an orderly democratic means of expression by the people or sections of the people, contradictions amid conflicts are bound to result leading to a repressive response from the State. And it is that response, accompanied by a process of miilitarisation, which has brought in its train the practice of arbitrary arrest, detention, torture, disappearances amid summary executions, not only in the areas affected by the armed ethnic conflict, but increasingly so in the South of the island.
Mr Chairman, the real situation is reflected by the fact that Sri Lanka bias figured prominently in the three reports of the Special Rapporteurs and by the fact that thousands have fled the country in search of physical security, and not by the abstract, technical and often theoretical arguments advanced by Sri Lanka before this Commission
Mr Chairman, no longer can the government of Sri Lanka divert the attention of those genuinely concerned by the human rights situation in that country by references to separatism and terrorism. It must, as we said earlier, address itself to the root causes that have given rise to violence and violations that characterise Sri Lankan society today.
What is worth looking into and finding out more about is what the personal trajectory of Ms. Kunanayakam from human rights defender to human rights violations apologist? Can we – can Thamarai – dig a bit deeper and tell us the story of how she – and others – have moved from one to the other? This would tell us a lot.
It is true, as “Joker” reminds us, that a lot has happened in the intervening 24 years. DId the brutality of the LTTE contribute to Ms. Kunanayakam’s conversion? Perhaps they killed someone in her family, as they did to so many other Tamils?
Or was it simply exhaustion at being on the outside and not always wanting to be the critic and the trouble-maker – did Ms. Kunanayakam want somewhere to belong, and something easier to believe in?
Or did she simply want to be able to retire to her own country with some peace and security – something that human rights defenders – esp. in Sri Lanka – often have a hard time doing, should they even live to retirement age.
Thank, you, Thamarai, for highlighting an important issue – now to ask and try and answer some other questions, too.
Dear Thamarai,
As impressive as your Googling skills are, I’m afraid this bit about Ms. Kunanayakam’s interesting past was already revealed by our own intrepid justitia here three weeks ago.
My response to both justitia and you:
Justitia, what is so strange about that? There have been far more bizarre cases like that of LTTE-supporter Shiva Pasupathy, who was the Attorney General under JR Jayawardene and drafted the original PTA that put hundreds of Tamil men behind bars before the war. He went on to become one of the legal luminaries behind ISGA!
How do you feel about people like Mr. Pasupathy?
We are here talking about people who are right now involved in directing the rudder when the war is over and the country has to find its feet to resolve the turmoil in the country. The whole of Northeast is in a mess which cannot be understood by many outside it – even media are doing a disservice by not reporting the suffering of the people under the brutal muilitary presence and administration – self-censorship.
Four UN Special Rapporteurs have been waiting for years to be allowed in:
http://www.thesundayleader.lk/2011/09/04/sign-convention-insists-un/
4 September 2011: ”The Working Group on Enforced or Involuntary Disappearances has also sought a visit to Sri Lanka on numerous occasions but the Sri Lankan government has yet to approve such a visit.”
http://www2.ohchr.org/english/bodies/hrcouncil/docs/17session/A.HRC.17.27_en.pdf
Report of the Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression, Frank La Rue*, 16 May 2011:
”As of March 2011, the following visit requests from the Special Rapporteur were pending: the Islamic Republic of Iran (requested in February 2010), Sri Lanka (requested in June 2009), Tunisia (requested in 2009), and the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela (requested in 2003 and 2009).
http://www.minorityrights.org/10458/reports/no-war-no-peace-the-denial-of-minority-rights-and-justice-in-sri-lanka.htmlNo war, no peace: the denial of minority rights and justice in Sri Lanka, Report by Minority Rights Group International, 19 January 2011:
”The UN Independent Expert on Minority Issues should be granted an invitation by the government to visit the country in order to report to the United Nations Human Rights Council on the situation of minorities in Sri Lanka.”
http://www.un.org/apps/news/story.asp?NewsID=31881&Cr=sri+lanka&Cr1=
Sri Lanka: UN rights expert calls for probe into video of alleged executions,28 August 2009: ‘’Professor Alston added that he regretted that the Government had not yet issued him an invitation to make an official visit to Sri Lanka, despite a number of requests in recent years, but he hoped an invitation may come given the new allegations.’’
In the last 63 years Tamils have been trying all sorts of things to get out of the oppression – the end is nowhere on the horizon(some comments here are good evidence):
http://transcurrents.com/tc/2010/08/outline_of_submission_made_to.html
Jayantha Dhanapala’s written submission to Lessons Learnt and Reconciliation
Commission(LLRC), August 2010: ‘’The lessons we have to learn go back to the past – certainly from the time that we had responsibility for our own governance on 4 February 1948 . Each and every Government which held office from 1948 till the present bear culpability for the failure to achieve good governance, national unity and a framework of peace, stability and economic development in which all ethnic, religious and other groups could live in security and equality. Our inability to manage our own internal affairs has led to foreign intervention but more seriously has led to the taking of arms by a desperate group of our citizens’’.
If the diplomats refuse to distort the truth, Sri Lanka would be in a better situation:
http://transcurrents.com/tc/2009/10/ambassador_aryasinha_misleads.html
Ambassador Aryasinha misleads EU on Tissainayagam, LTTE and Al-Qaeda, Premila Canagaratna, 11 October 2009
(Premila Canagaratna is an Attorney at Law and a member of the Bar Association of Sri Lanka. She was present in court several times during the Tissainayagam hearings including when the decision was made in High Court.)
Mahinda Samarasinghe’s UNHRC address on 12 September – all the things that should have been happening !!!!
Unfortunately not happening due to lack of political will ????
Clearly the author of this post is not aware of what diplomacy entails.
What is it now please?
What should it be to get the country out of the misery?
joker,
“Thamarai, I will give you one point though, that is for identifying though subconsciously that “the human rights community of Sri Lanka is packed with wolves in sheep’s clothing” and that most are acting” purely [on]agenda-driven activism”. They rarely go to the courts or police or make use of other mechanisms like the Grama Sevaka but make foreign embassies their first point of complaint, no doubt rewarded with $$ and hamburgers.”-
What is the point in going to courts, police or Grama Sevakas? Do they or are they in a position to help. They rarely do as they are state agencies. So no wonder the HR community makes foreign embassies their first point of complaint.
Thamarai
How about an analysis of Mahinda Samarasinghe’s presentation to UNHRC on 12 September?
James Chance
”human rights defender to human rights violations”
As far as
i.the President is concerned:
human rights defender – it was to protect Sinhalese and to come to power
human rights violations – to please the Sinhalese and to stay in power.
ii.Tamara Gunanayagam
human rights defender – conscience
human rights violator – cannot resist the highest post desired by many foreign diplomats of many countries (it will not be available to any conscietious Sri Lankan, be a Sinhalese, Muslim or a Tamil.
Partiality?
UNIFYING TASKS FOR A FUTURE NORTHERN PROVINCIAL COUNCIL, National Peace Council, 11 September 2011:
‘’A confidence building measure that the government could take with respect to moving forward in the political process would be to announce the date for the conduct of provincial council elections for the Northern Province. So far it is only the people of the Northern Province who have been deprived of the benefits of provincial level devolution. They need to enjoy the same rights and privileges in respect of devolution of power that the people in the rest of the country enjoy.’’
http://www.nation.lk/2011/02/20/newsfe5.htm
”Education Minister of the Eastern Provincial Council Wimalaweera Dissanayake complained that their Governor has become a stumbling block to the smooth functioning of the Provincial Ministries including his.
Chief Secretary Western Provincial Council Lalith Kannangara, Opposition Leader Kithsiri Kahatapitiya and PC member Mahesh Almeida said that their Governor Alavi Mowlana, despite being a politician himself does not interfere in the administrative affairs of the Council. PC members and officials from the UVA PC also said that their Governor Nanda Mathew too was non-interfering.”
(Governors of North and East Provincial Councils are retired military personnel)
”High Commissioner does not have the will to even acknowledge paradigm shift in the policy of the Government of Sri Lanka”
Any paradigm shift?
1. ‘Twenty Two Years of Devolution – An Evaluation of the Working of Provincial Councils(PCs) in Sri Lanka’, launched on 21 December 2010 says:
‘’… Recentralization is the hallmark of the system. Today, PCs have become a means by which the centre controls regional resources. They have also become the avenues through which the centre consolidates its political power.
2. http://www.amnesty.org/en/library/info/ASA37/005/2009/en
SRI LANKA: TWENTY YEARS OF MAKE-BELIEVE. SRI LANKA’S COMMISSIONS OF INQUIRY, 11 JUNE 2009
3. http://transcurrents.com/news-views/archives/2586#more-2586
Economic development alone will not satisfy minority grievances – An Interview with Jayantha Dhanapala by Namini Wijedasa, 30 July 2011:
”In the interim report of the LLRC, recommendations were made which were eminently sensible and humane, and which would have been a step in the process of reconciliation that the government talks about. The president accepted the recommendations very promptly, to his credit. A committee was appointed, the usual bureaucratic game, presided over by Attorney General Mohan Peiris, but we have still not heard about implementation. This, itself, is going to cut at the root of the credibility of the LLRC! What guarantee have we got that a) the report will be published b) that it will be implemented if the interim recommendations, which were very, very simple, are not implemented.’’
4.
M. Rajapakse, 15 June 2011: ”If I make any devolutionary concessions to the Tamils, it will be curtains for me”
L. Athulathmudali, 4 Feb 1985: ‘’Proposing a federal constitution will be political suicide.”
R. Wickremasinghe, 13 May 1997: “We are a political party. Like any other political party, we will not do anything that will not get us into power, nor would we do anything when we are in power to lose power.”
Will Groundviews let the readers have the entire presentation by HE Ambassador at UNHRC please?
http://www.lankamission.org/content/view/2767/1/
Madam President,
You must note, however unpalatable it may be to some, that terrorism has not been allowed to rear its ugly head since 2009, in Sri Lanka. We, like many other like-minded nations, are not willing to create nurseries for terrorists wherever they may be.
Madam President,
The partiality of the High Commissioner has once again been manifestly demonstrated in the Council today.
You would recall that in April this year, following the extraordinary public release of the Darusman Report, which was compiled purely for the advisory purposes of the UN Secretary General, the High Commissioner referred to Sri Lanka’s successful humanitarian operation as being one carried out “under the guise of fighting terrorism”. Sri Lanka, at the June session of the Council, was quick to remind the High Commissioner of the gross inaccuracy of that statement. In this context, it may be recalled that in the wake of the 11th September tragedy, the UN invoked the right of self defence and called upon the international community to neutralize or combat such terrorism by non-state actors by its resolution 1368 and 1373 of September 2001. The humanitarian operation was part of an act of the sovereign State and its people in the wake of terrorist aggression. It is equally undeniable that Sri Lanka has taken definite steps, at great cost, to resettle and rebuild the lives of the people in the conflict affected areas. It is apparent to all that the military capability of the terrorists to launch offensives against the people and Government of Sri Lanka has been completely degraded.
The High Commissioner’s characterization is wholly misplaced as the community of nations was well aware that Sri Lanka was combating one of the most ruthless terrorist organizations in the world. We find this distorted position once again reiterated by the reference to Sri Lanka in the present context, in crass disregard to contextual developments.
Therefore, I categorically dispute the assertion of the High Commissioner that the combat of terrorism was designed with insufficient regard to human rights, more particularly, having regard to the giant strides that Sri Lanka has taken in the reconciliation process, and the numerous measures that the leader of our delegation has referred to this morning in his statement.
I must also observe that it appears that the High Commissioner does not have the will to even acknowledge a paradigm shift in the policy of the Government of Sri Lanka. In her statement, she treats the lifting of emergency regulations so lightly and fails to acknowledge that they are withdrawn in their entirety. Sri Lanka observes that the High Commissioner’s position on the withdrawal of emergency misleads the Council with regard to the true legal position.
In conclusion, Madam President, it has to be appreciated that each Member State of this Council does recognize the need to have a security related legislation, and it has to be noted that Sri Lanka’s only existing legislation as it stands today is less stringent than the modern legislations of some other countries, which provide for the most stringent of measures in the treatment of terrorism.
The amorphous statement about the undermining of independence of institutions, human rights and rule of law, I reiterate is strenuously denied, and I must place on record that all national institutions today function with due regard to established principles of international law, administrative governance and with respect to the rule of law as prescribed in the fundamental rights and directive principles of state policies, as enshrined in the constitution of the Republic. We remain dedicated to building a country based on all-pervading unity, equity and justice.
Thank you.
”Sri Lanka’s only existing legislation as it stands today is less stringent than the modern legislations of some other countries” …
Sri Lanka: A Mounting Tragedy of Errors, Report by International Commission of Jurists, Paul Sieghart, March 1984:
“These provisions (in the Prevention of Terrorism Act) are quite extraordinarily wide. No legislation conferring even remotely comparable powers is in force in any other free democracy operating under the Rule of Law, however troubled it may be by politically motivated violence. Indeed there is only one known precedent for the power to impose restriction orders under section 11 of the Sri Lankan P.T.A., and that – as Professor Leary rightly pointed out in her Report – is the comparable legislation currently in force in South Africa… such a provision is an ugly blot on the statute book of any civilised country. The impact of the communal violence on the Tamils was shattering. The evidence points clearly to the conclusion that the violence of the Sinhala rioters on the Tamils amounted to Acts of Genocide”.
Was Guantanamo and the Patriots Act in existence at that time?
”a lot has happened in the intervening 24 years”:
Oppression, more oppression, …. is what has been happening unabated:
http://www.llrc.lk/images/stories/docs/Sep2010/10.11.2010-Mr._Elmore_Perera-evidence.pdf
Elmore Perera(Founder, Citizens’ Movement for Good Governance(CIMOGG) to LLRC, 10 November 2010: Beginning with the “Sinhala Only” policy of 1956, which disregarded the multi-cultural and pluralistic nature of society, the removal of the constitutional provision guaranteeing minority rights … The 1983 racial riots were a disaster. Tamils were treated as being sub-human. Many of those who could leave the country by lawful or even unlawful means did so. Those who remained were subjected to arbitrary, humiliating treatment. Rounding up of 30 to 40 Tamil youth on Friday evenings, producing them before Magistrates to be remanded, and later releasing them on bail, after they had paid lawyers Rs1,000/- each for this purpose, was a regular occurrence in many parts of the city. Tamils, who could readily be identified as such from their National Identity Cards, were at the mercy of the law-enforcement agencies which arbitrarily enforced even laws of their own making …”
http://www.llrc.lk/images/stories/docs/Sep2010/K%20Godage.pdf
K.Godage(former Sri Lankan diplomat) addresses LLRC, 15 September 2010:
‘’….The Tamils have undergone, and are undergoing immense hardship. We need to reach out to them…. We have persistently discriminated against the Tamil people from 1956…. There is no reason for any one to be insecure, as a result of giving into the reasonable demands of the Tamil people. …. Now I must tell you of a very, very sad situation, particularly bad and dangerous situation. We have in our prisons over 2000 young Tamil men. Some of them have been taken on suspicion. Just picked up and taken. In detention without charges for years, Sir, for years ….’’
Thamarai – “Any government apologist would be expected to make the point that emergency has been lifted and that normalcy has been restored in the country. In other words, it is perfectly safe to hold the Commonwealth Games in Sri Lanka. Yet the Prevention of Terrorism Act (PTA) continues to be enforced”
Check what happens in Blake Land, 10 years after the event!
SECURING NEW YORK
http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b0153yl5
BTW – it is perfectly safe to visit NY.
Dear PresiDunce,
“To those whom they fought against, V. Prabakaran and Mr Pottu Amman were terrorists.But for those whom they fought on behalf of, they were heroes and liberation fighters.”
Thank you for this study in moral relativism. Would you agree then that only Eelamoid hypocrites who looked the other way quietly when V. Prabakaran and Mr Pottu Amman were massacring their own people would refer to Ms Kunanayakam as “Quisling?”
Thamarai
Grateful to you – continue your service – the oppressed must get justice.
Kunanayagams, Karunas, KPs, … must stop and think – they’re propogating the conflict and block the path to peace and reconciliation.
We cannot afford to go on like this any more.
Concrete walls and barbed wire can be brought down.
But never-ending crop of bootlickers…..
No, No, No, ……
Dear Thamarai, Vino Gamage,PresiDunce Bean ….;
What is your idea about Dr.Rajani Thiranagama? Do you justify her 180 degrees turn in the middle or not? Why do you think that intelligent and learned activist change her mind to get killed by the LTTE?
Do you hold the view that all the Tamil intellectuals who went against LTTE/got killed by LTTE were boot lickers? Do you say no Tamil intellectual can hold a different view than yours, not becoming a boot licker?
Same fascist LTTE ideology, that does not tolerate alternative views.
Ayeth Ohoma yun!
Thanks!
Some Tigers like Karuna,Pillaiyan, KP, Daya master, …. are given protection. They should be tried. Not imprisoned for years without charges and trials.
But then the President has aborted the Udalagama commission with hundredes of white van cases uninvestigated.
Udalagama commission finished six cases and submitted report in July 2009. Not yet published.
APRC gave a report in July 2009. Not yet published.
What do you call it? Fascism?
LTTE and Thiranagama are gone.
Satyagraha was crushed by the military, Banda-Chelva pact was literally torn, Dudley-Chelva pact into the bin,…..
PTA and new laws are currently in force. …
Kunanayagam is talking about the current law that affects the lives of many. So let’s talk about this.
Some countries used white vans while other “civlised” countries used white learjets that landed in Libya in their fight against terror!
Thiranagama criticised the methods of LTTE. But she also condemned the the oppressive Sinhalese governments.
So did Thiruchelvam and many others.
Satyagraha didn’t work. B-C pact didn’t . D-C pact didn’t LTTE didn’t. APRC didn’t. Now they’re fiddling with PSC. Meanwhile the President has said it would be curtains on him if he gives devolution of power to Tamils. Why are we wasting our time here?
Yeah Silva, but Thiranagama and Tiruchelvam were not killed by the oppressive Sinhalese or their government. they were killed by the Tamil Tigers whose banner is still brandished at Diaspora demonstrations, and who have yet to be condemend by the TNA or any of the Diaspora organizations such as the TGTE, GTF, BTF.
What does that tell you? What does that tell us?
@ Dr Dayan Jayatilleka
So who killed MP Raviraj, Joseph Pararahasingham, Lasntha Wickeamatunge and made Pradeep Eknaligoda vanish into thin air? The LTTE?
What does that tell you? What does that tell us?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_attacks_attributed_to_the_Sri_Lankan_military
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enforced_disappearances_in_Sri_Lanka
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sri_Lanka_and_state_terrorism
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Allegations_of_State_terrorism_by_Sri_Lanka
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lasantha_Wickrematunge#Mervyn_Silva_publicly_admits_to_killing_Wickrematunge
Thiranagama was once a member of the LTTE. Until she was actually assassinated by the LTTE, very few on the Sinhalese side took her seriously. The same is true with Lakshman Kadirgimir and Neelan Tiruchelvam. After Neelan was killed, many Sinhalese talked about his efforts at devolution. After Kadirgimir was killed, the same fan club touted him as a future president of Sri Lanka! The point is this same fan club does not care to talk about devolution or Tamil presidents in relation to any Tamils who may be alive. Sri Lankan Tamil intellectuals and their contributions are only useful in the past tense!
Why are people citing the wrong things done by the other countries when we are talking about the wrong things happening in our country instead of putting them right?
Follow the President’s advice:
”we can derive guidance from the wise words of Gautama the Buddha who advised the Lichchavi Princes, whose energies were being consumed by bitter disputes among them, that the way forward consists of meeting, discussing and departing in an atmosphere of amity and goodwill”
“Why are people citing the wrong things done by the other countries when we are talking about the wrong things happening in our country instead of putting them right?”
Probably due to the platform used
Local platform keeps the discussion local
International platform makes the discussion global.
While Ambassador Kunanayakam is perfectly capable of explaining and defending her evolution, I am amused and amazed at the obvious omissions and distortions in the article and most of the comments.
For one, Tamara Kunanayakam did not undergo an overnight conversion and parachute to Geneva as Permanent Representative. She has served Sri Lanka as a diplomat for several years now, first as our Charge d’ Affaires in Brazil and more recently as Ambassador in Havana.
Secondly, your writer and readers do not know that many years ago, well before she represented the Sri Lankan state, Tamara Kunanayakam was manhandled and violently slammed into a wall by LTTE activists, in the very precincts of the Human Rights Council, and was saved by the intervention of foreign delegates. So, Tamara’s anti-LTTE ideology has been consistent over a long duration, and is hardly the zeal of a recent convert, still less an opportunist.
Thirdly, much has changed since 1987, starting with the LTTE’s refusal to work the Indo-Lanka Accord and treat seriously with successive peace proposals throughout the 1990s right upto 2003 Tokyo meeting which it boycotted. Most dramatic was the murder of Rajiv Gandhi.
Fourthly, world history changed with the downfall of the USSR and the resultant renewed emphasis of national sovereighty, independence and territorial unity on the part of the Left, especially in the Global South, ranging from Brazil through Cuba to Vietnam.
Fifthly, the solid vocal support extended to Sri Lanka (including last week in Geneva at the Canadian event) by the Latin American and Asian Left-ruled states spearheaded by Cuba and China (see TamilNet for scathing account) is evidence that Tamara, a long time progressive, anti-imperialist and Third Worldist, is hardly alone in her support for GoSL, the war and in her opposition to the infringement of national and state sovereignty.
Finally, do concede that she has been effective! The much expected storm against Sri Lanka did not break! The moment of maximum danger seems to have passed, at least till next year. Ambassador Kunanayakam’s superb speech, exercising the Right of Reply, at the Council yesterday (Friday, Sept 23), shows how she marshalls her arguments, determinedly refuses to take a step backwards, and has effectively retained or won back the support of the bulk of the Council. The campaign against Sri Lanka is currently prosecuted in Geneva, mainly by a cartel of NGOs and t a lesser degree by a minority of states from the so-called Western Group at the HRC.
Why don’t you folk access the webcast and check her out for yourselves? have a nice weekend, ya’ll.
– http://www.unmultimedia.org/tv/webcast/2011/09/right-of-replies-26th-plenary-meeting-18th-session-human-rights-council.html
timeline, at mts 2.48-2.52
Great speech.
Incisive and to the point.
Thank you for posting the link DJ
Thank you, Dr. Jayatilleke for sharing your thoughts, and for not misquoting Scarface again.
The PTA is the same ‘ugly blot on the statute book of any civilised country’ today as it was 24 years ago. If one changes one’s opinion about the PTA simply because one had a run in with some LTTE activist, one’s advocacy lacked conviction in the first place. That was the point of the piece, wasn’t it?
I’m not interested in how effective the Ambassador is. I’m sure she has been adequately trained, and that she is good at her job. I don’t assume there was an overnight metamorphosis either. I suspect such transformation takes years to cultivate. What I am interested in is her lack of credibility, both as a genuine defender of state sovereignty and as a former human rights advocate. I’m sure she, and others like her, will do just fine even if there is a regime change.
Please don’t attempt to make the defence of the PTA at international fora into some ‘progressive, anti-imperialist and Third Worldist’ struggle against Western oppressors. That’s just nonsensical jargon that doesn’t impress anyone. The same Western oppressors have similar legislation that should also be condemned. No one is exempted. Let’s face it: the PTA is a lazy piece of legislation that excuses the inability of law enforcement officials to convict offenders under the ordinary criminal justice system today. It’s a classic cop out (pun intended). It permits lazy policemen to collect confessions from suspects; lazy prosecutors to rely on nothing else but on such confessions; and lazy judges to convict the accused relying solely on such confessions. The examples are numerous. If you had actually been seriously prosecuted under the PTA, perhaps you would share my sentiments—particularly since personal experiences seem to dictate the convictions of today’s diplomats. The PTA oppresses citizens of your own country, Dr. Jayatilleke. Neither a grudge against the LTTE nor a penchant for sticking it to whitey should delude anyone into thinking otherwise.
Well said Thamarai! The very same people who condemn Guantanamo have no problem supporting the PTA! Aaaaaaah the schizophrenic world we live in!
Dear Thamarai,
“What I am interested in is her lack of credibility,”
Kindly educate us whom you consider to be a model of credibility.
It’s simply that human rights violators support each other at intergovernmental bodies. It has been very successful with the most heinous Sinhala Buddhist Nationalism(William Gopallawa had to break protocol by going over to Temople Trees to force Bandaranaike to declare emregency after 3 days of 1958 riots and JRJayawardene took 4 days to declare emergency and came on the radio to say the most venomous things):
http://jbe.gold.ac.uk/10/dhammavihari-sri-lanka-conf.html
Recording, Translating and Interpreting Sri Lankan Chronicle Data By Ven. Prof. Dhammavihari, Conference on Buddhism and Conflict in Sri Lanka 2001: ‘’…This was the beginning of nationalism among the Sinhalese.….. A kind of religio-nationalism, which almost amounted to fanaticism, roused the whole Sinhalese people. A non-Buddhist was not regarded as a human being …”
Successive governments have been expertly controlling damage at the UN and the Commonwealth for decades.
Dayan, you greatly helped by explicitly pitting the South against the North and the East against the West in the most poisonous speeches and writings in at least the last 4/5 years.
In the world order where the oppressed have no representation at intergovernmental bodies, oppressors rule.
All has been too easy in a small island. Had it been connected by land to any other country, 50s/60s would have seen nearly all the Tamils flee the country. The fish in the Palk Straits have a lot of tales to tell.
There are so many conscientious Sri Lankans who are too ashamed to open their mouths.
Human rights and militarization cannot exist peacefully, side-by-side. That is because full-scale militarization falls under the umbrella of a much larger beast, that of totalitarianism. The USSR, for example, totally disregarded human rights while giving sole precedence to “national security.” While there were a few good things that came from this (advances in science/technology, chess!), the project ultimately collapsed when the satellite entities rebelled. Some would say China is a counterexample, but look at how many Chinese continue to emigrate (exit out) – millions per year. Besides, discounting economic growth, China is nowhere nears it far more liberal, successful, neighbor Japan (in contrast, one doesn’t find any significant number of Japanese refugees).
Liberalism provides a better much context for human rights. It is ironic that Sri Lanka as a society does not embrace more liberal values, when Buddhism, at its core, is liberal. Now, I am not saying Buddhist values should supersede the rule of law. But it cannot be denied that a system of laws is often made with a cultural context in mind. For example, Western law is heaviy influenced by Judeo-Christian values. The paradox, of course, is that Sri Lanka has a PTA/ER and continues on the path of no-holes-barred militarization, much more similar to its friend and neighbour, the radically Islamicized Pakistan.
When reasonable things failed for three decades LTTE emerged to be VIOLENT – not that it is right bur because that was the only thing left to try. Only heinous states should be compared with such violent rebels. States are supposed to be fair to all citizens. Mhhh… the President talks about Gaudhma Buddha at the UN ! To WHOM ?
Hundreds of thousands of Tamils have been murdered by Sinhala thugs spurred on by politicians and the armed forces.
Such heinous LTTE could have been created by a much more heinous state !!
Someone who refuses to investigate into crimes is addressing the UN ! Such is the quality of the UN members !!
Some people here know a few names like Thiranagama, Thiruchelvam, etc.. (for whom we have great regard – but that doesn’t mean tolerance of state terrorism).
Why do some people take that criticism of the government is praise of LTTE ??
Power-hungry politicians and mythology have produced such illogic in the society.
Why do some people take that criticism of the government is praise of LTTE ??
Probably because such criticism about the LTTE was absent when the LTTE was active
Some Sri Lankans cannot distinguish between action and reaction, the ruler and the ruled, ….
Terrorism of the ruler created the LTTE and LTTE is wiped out and terrorism of the ruler continues unabated.
It is no more ignorance, it’s viciousness of 63 years going unabated …
CEYLON : A DIVIDED NATION, B H Farmer(1963):”The truth, though unpalatable may be to some, is simply that nobody unacceptable to the present Sinhalese Buddhist nationalism has any chance of constitutional power in contemporary Ceylon.”
This is still dripping out of this page.
The good man says there is no escape from this island cage:
Dear Neville,
You wrote “It is no more ignorance, it’s viciousness of 63 years going unabated … “
63 Years ….. ?
63 years since Independence is correct but…….
Was the Govt bureaucracy unpopulated by High Cast Vellala Tamils from the North all that time?
Was it not Dominated by them?
What about Pre Independence, did not the Tamil Vellalas’ control Govt Bureaucracy during that time?
How long did that period of Tamil Vellalar domination continue, a few Centuries?
Were they Just, in administering the Non Vellalar Tamils?
Did the Low Cast Tamils receive Justice from them?
Did the Majority Sinhalese receive Justice from them?
Terrorism of the ruler created………the Ethnic divide?
Dear Neville,
Invite your attention to the posts at the following links
http://groundviews.org/2011/09/28/cheran/#comment-37282
http://groundviews.org/2011/09/28/cheran/#comment-37315
Hi Thamarai,
If you had simply stuck to the point about the PTA instead of a blanket denunciation you might have had a credible point.
Since I am probably the only one on this website who has actually been indicted under the PTA, I cannot but agree with the position taken by the best known Southern political prisoner, certainly the best known southern woman political prisoner under the PTA, and a founder of the Campaign Against the PTA (CAPTA) on the subject of its repeal, in an extended interview last year in the Sunday Leader. Pulsara Liyanage reminds readers that in this post-9/11 era there must NOT be a total repeal of the PTA but that it must be drastically revised so as to be limited to VIOLENT offenses.
Ambassador Tamara Kunanyakam’s ‘lack of credibility’ you say? In comparison to whom or what? To someone who hides behind a pseudonym even in cyberspace?
Anyway, she sure seems to have had enough credibility to ensure that the much advertised massive, post Channel 4, post-Darusman, post Gordon Weiss onslaught on Sri Lanka which folk like you expected at this session of the UN HRC, just could not get off the ground, despite the efforts of a cartel of NGOs and a few states.
She also seems to have mustered enough ‘credibility’ to have been ELECTED Vice-Chair of UNCTAD’s Trade and Development Board last week.
As for your homily on the use and misuse by GoSL of Third Worldism at the UNHRC and other fora, Thamarai, let the Third World be the judge of that, and let’s just see how the voting goes, eh?
In the meanwhile why don’t you ponder Tamara’s Right of reply in the UN HRC last week, which may address some of your concerns?
)
“Response of the delegation of Sri Lanka to comments made during the General Debate under Item 4 Delivered by H. E. Ms. Tamara Kunanayakam, Ambassador/Permanent Representative to the United Nations:
Mr. President, The Delegation of Sri Lanka wishes to respond to the references made to Sri Lanka by certain delegations. To those who question the credibility and independence of Sri Lanka’s Lessons Learnt and Reconciliation Commission, I wish to reiterate that we cannot accept such a priorijudgements of our domestic mechanism even before it has had the chance to complete its work and make its findings public.
To those who welcome the transmission of the report of the UN Secretary General’s Panel of Experts, we wish to say, once again, that any attempt to admit any such document or information contrary to established procedures would be inappropriate, irregular and procedurally improper and will establish a bad precedent which could be prejudicial to the future effectiveness of the Council. That report is neither the product of a request of the Human Rights Council nor of any other inter-governmental body. It may also be viewed as an attempt to legitimize a document which is based on undisclosed sources and which has no evidentiary value, more so because of the categorical declaration in the document itself that it is premised upon unproven facts. The attempt to inveigle the Panel Report through a perverse circumvention of procedure was, even more reprehensible and equally repugnant to our policy of settling further our domestic mechanisms.
Mr. President, References were being made in the Council to the benefit of an initiative to bring into focus the work of the LLRC by way of an interactive dialogue. Mr. President, It would be unprecedented and a complete abdication of sovereignty for Sri Lanka to submit itself to a review process that would entail the scrutiny of its domestic mechanisms by an external mechanism, circumventing its long established constitutional machinery. This would also result in established procedure of the Council being rendered a mockery, unless of course, this Council resolves itself to return to the days of the Human Rights Commission where might was simply right! In the circumstances, such a request would be a usurpation of Sri Lanka’s sovereignty and clearly be ultra vires the mandate of the Council.
Why, we ask – is this indecent hurry for a special differential treatment of Sri Lanka? Sri Lanka is committed to extend its utmost co-operation to this Council. We have always shared our experiences, achievements and even our failings in a spirit of a constructive dialogue. Sri Lanka continues to be steadfastly committed to the promotion and protection of all human rights, including the right to development.
Mr. President, It is only fitting and proper that Sri Lanka should be allowed to continue its reconciliation process unimpeded, without the machinations of some States to undermine the authority of this Council by reopening a decision that it has already taken in 2009. If this trend is allowed to subsist, it will lead to a dangerous precedent that could be used against any developing country. It will also have the inevitable result of deepening confrontation and undermining the credibility and legitimacy of the process.
I wish to conclude by calling upon all countries committed to genuine international co-operation in human rights to reject any action to promote mechanisms that lead to partiality, selectivity and double standards. Thank you Mr. President.”
Courtesy : The Permanent Mission to Sri Lanka at the United Nations’ Office in Geneva
Dear Dj,
“If this trend is allowed to subsist, it will lead to a dangerous precedent that could be used against any developing country”
The above statement of fact is what the drum beaters fail to understand.
I didn’t realize credibility is a relative concept that needs to be proven in comparison to something. I would presume that stating something now that is diametrically opposed to what you said previously–albeit in a different capacity–dents (to put it mildly) your credibility. Also, how your likeminded friends see you now is certainly no measure for credibility. Anyway, I think you and I have different benchmarks for determining credibility, Dr. Jayatilleka. It would be pointless to discuss it any further.
But I’m fascinated about your position on the PTA. I assume you refer to this opinion by Pulsara Liyanage (it was actually in September 2009):
‘In the past few months, I have discussed with a few friends the present status of the PTA. Some say it should be repealed since the war is won. Some hold the view including persons who were once accused under the PTA that a state needs a PTA. In the light of 9/11 and the experience of the Sri Lanka cricket team in Pakistan, I find myself in sympathy with the latter view. I think it is now time to bring in some amendments to the existing Act or a new such Act. I recommend the inclusion of all forms of political violence into such an Act as punishable offences, while bringing it in line with the fundamental and constitutional rights of the citizen.’
Source: http://www.thesundayleader.lk/archive/20090913/law.htm
Missed the last bit, didn’t we?
So you agree that the Ambassador was wrong to defend the PTA the way she did. You admit the Act needs to be amended, quite drastically it would appear. Pray tell, what amendments do you suggest? Should the PTA, as your friend suggests, be brought in line with ‘the fundamental and constitutional rights of the citizen’? What value would it bring to combating terrorism if it is in fact amended to such an extent? Do you still think the admissibility of confessions and preventive detention are alright? Those were the issues the Ambassador quite correctly raised back in 1987. Aren’t these the relatively ‘less stringent…means in the treatment of terrorism’ the Ambassador defends now? Fascinating.
Hi Tamarai, you expected me to remember every sentence of a paragraph of a 2009 interview? Hah! Anyway, ‘Tamarai’, I agree totally with what Pulsara says in that quote.
Credibility is not determined by what the like-minded say, but nor is it determined by what prejudiced critics and foes say ( especially anaonymous or pseudonymous ones).
What is operative is whether or not Tamara enjoys credibility in her present domain, as evidenced by results. That she seems to, given that at least this time around the much advertised campaign by Sri Lanka’s foes wound up a bit of a damp squib and that Tamara herself has been nominated and elected to two posts, in the short time she has been in Geneva.
Since you and those on this thread are such fans of Stri Lanka, the UN HRC Geneva and Tamara, let me conclude by sharing with you a newsreport of her intervention which would show you that Sri Lanka and Tamara are hardly shaking in their boots and have taken a firm principled stance, refusing to take a single step backwards. Enjoy!
Sri Lanka warns against attempt to infringe on sovereignty
COLOMBO, Sept. 26 (Xinhua) — Sri Lanka on Monday sought support against attempts to infringe on the country’s sovereignty by pushing for an international war crimes probe.
The Sri Lankan External Affairs Ministry quoted Sri Lanka’s Ambassador to Geneva, Tamara Kunanayakam, as saying that countries committed to genuine international cooperation on human rights must reject any action to promote mechanisms that lead to partiality, selectivity and double standards.
Several attempts are being made by some countries at the UN Human Rights Council in Geneva to push for an international probe into allegations the Sri Lankan military committed human rights abuses during the final stages of the war against Tamil Tiger rebels.
“It would be unprecedented and a complete abdication of sovereignty for Sri Lanka to submit itself to a review process that would entail the scrutiny of its domestic mechanisms by an external mechanism, circumventing its long established constitutional machinery,” Kunanayakam said.
A panel of experts appointed by UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon in a report made public earlier this year found that over 40,000 civilians were killed during the final stages of the war which ended with the defeat of the rebels in May 2009.
The report has now been submitted to the UN Human Rights Council which is currently meeting in Geneva and there are attempts to pass a resolution against Sri Lanka using the report.
“To those who welcome the transmission of the report of the UN Secretary General’s Panel of Experts, we wish to say, once again, that any attempt to admit any such document or information contrary to established procedures would be inappropriate, irregular and procedurally improper and will establish a bad precedent which could be prejudicial to the future effectiveness of the Council. That report is neither the product of a request of the Human Rights Council nor of any other inter-governmental body,” Kunanayakam said.
The Sri Lankan government, which had appointed a local commission to look into some of the incidents which took place during the war, says it should be allowed to continue its reconciliation process unimpeded.
Sri Lanka warned that if the attempt to impose an international investigation on the country is allowed to proceed it could lead to a dangerous precedent that could be used against any developing country.
——————————————————————————–
“if the attempt to impose an international investigation on the country is allowed to proceed it could lead to a dangerous precedent that could be used against any developing country”
What’s wrong with that? There is nothing sacrosanct about being a ‘developing country’!
Besides, dangerous for whom? – For those who hold and wield power treating the country as if it was their private back-garden, or for the common good of the every-day people.
Dear Sambar,
Sour Grapes?
You wrote “What’s wrong with that? There is nothing sacrosanct about being a ‘developing country’! ”
That you cannot identify the “wrong” is not surprising.
Does SELECTIVE application mean anything to you?
You wrote “Besides, dangerous for whom?”
She was not talking of Personalities but of Countries. Is understanding the language that difficult?
Even by any other name this is not a face I would trust!
You don’t trust her excellency, Huh?
Thanks!
Dear Sambar,
You are looking up and spitting
Dear OfftheCuff,
One must always remember to quickly move away if one is required to look up and spit
Dear Sambar,
Apparently you got tripped ..he he
The problem with barbed wire for the CNN is, it is seen as a mark of subjugation, and torture because of the bad reputation the barbed wire got, from Hitler’s concentration camps. And the Western people don’t use it anymore to mark boundaries. They always use wood or more expensive material. But for us in Sri Lanka barbed wire is the cheapest material we can get hold of, to make a boundary. Our President should have explained this to the CNN journalist in a better way. Even the poor vilager uses barbed to make his fence. Does it means that he is keeping in family as hostages?
Going by the attacks on Tamara Kunanayakam it is apparent that she had done her work magnificently.
Well done, Madam. Hats off to you for being brave enough to consider and reconsider your views
and speak up for the truth.
As for those who are p—ed off by her speech and stand at the UN on behalf of SL, go get a life and
an education like her’s before opening your mouths to utter useless garbage!