Funeral of Pattani Razeek | Photo courtesy of Deutsche Presse Agentur

(Editors’ note: The report below is a follow-up from the last update about Mr. Pattani Razeek’s case, which was published on 17^th August 2011 and can be read here.)

1. Background and key events:

Mr. Pattani Razeek was a Sri Lankan Human Rights Defender who disappeared on 11^th February 2010. At the time of his disappearance, Mr. Razeek was the Managing Trustee of the Community Trust Fund (CTF) (www.ctfsrilanka.org) and an Executive Committee Member of the Asian Forum for Human Rights and Development (FORUM-ASIA) (www.forum-asia.org).

For over a year following the disappearance, there was no credible action by the police to investigate the case despite several leads. The chief suspect Shahadbeen Nowshaadh was not arrested until July 2011, despite being identified by police in May-June 2010.  The family, Puttlam Mosque Committee and those campaigning for justice in the case believe that the failure to arrest Nowshaadh is due to the involvement of Minister Rishad Bathiudeen, the Minister of Trade & Commerce under the current Government.

Arrests of Suspects:  The chief suspect, Nowshaadh was arrested by the Colombo Crimes Division (CCD) in Killinochchi on 9^th July 2011 in connection with Mr. Razeek’s abduction. The second suspect, Mushdeen was arrested by the CCD on 15^th July from Kollonnawa.  Soon after Mushdeen’s arrest, Minister Rishad Bathiudeen told a member of the Puttlam Mosque Committee that Mushdeen’s wife approached him to secure Musdeen’s release, but that he had refused to intervene in the case.

Exhumation (28^th July 2011): On 25^th July, Mr. Razeeks’ son, Riskhan was told by the Director, CCD that the police had received information from suspect Mushdeen that Mr. Razeek’s body had been buried in a village in Vallaichchenai and that police would be travelling to Vallaichchenai for further investigations. Riskhan accompanied the police to Vallaicchenai and on 28^th July, a body believed to be that of Mr. Razeek was exhumed from Thuraiaddy Street, Kavaththamunai, Vallaichchenai based on the information provided by suspect Mushdeen.

Riskhan identified the body as Mr. Razeek’s from his hair and underwear. The body had been wrapped in a sheet and buried in a pit about 4 ½ feet deep, inside a half built abandoned house belonging to Mushdeen’s aunt. The exhumation took place in the presence of the Vallaichchenai Magistrate A.M. Riyal, the Officer in Charge (OIC) of the Vallaichchenai police, several CCD officers, Mundalama police, the Judicial Medical Officer (JMO) Batticaloa Mr. Tikiri Banda Gunethileke, Scene of Crime Officers from Batticaloa, and the suspect Mushdeen. Journalists and civil society members were also present at the time.

Post Mortem: On 28^th July 2011, the body was taken to Batticaloa Hospital by the Vallaichchenai police. The post mortem was conducted on 2^nd August at 10 am at the Batticaloa Hospital. Before the post mortem, Riskan and two of Razeek’s brothers were allowed inside and identified the body as the remains exhumed in Vallaichchenai. The JMO also recorded Riskhan’s statement that he believed M. Nihamath, former Trustee General of CTF, to be responsible for Razeeks’ killing.

The post mortem ended at 1.30pm on 2^nd August, and the body was released to family members based on an order by the Vallachchenai Magistrate. The order mistakenly referred to the exhumation being conducted on 4^th July (instead of the correct date 28^th July), but when this was pointed out to the CCD officers, they assured that this would not be a problem to transport the body or in future court proceedings. Riskan, Ruki Fernando of Law & Society Trust, Mr. Razmi from the Puttalam Mosque Committee and several others noted the discrepancy. Mr. Razeek’s funeral was held on 3^rd August in Sameeragama Puttalam.

DNA Report/Government Analyst Report: Samples of Mr. Razeek teeth, skin, hair, etc were taken by the CCD and sent to the Gene Tech lab for DNA testing on 4^th August 201. Mr. Razeek’s son, Riskhan supplied blood to the Gene Tech Lab on 8^th August 2011.  Stomach samples from Mr. Razeek’s body were sent to the Government Analyst on 5^th August 2011. We do not have court proceedings which indicate whether the postmortem report and the DNA report have been submitted to Court.  However when Riskhan called Genetech regarding the DNA report on 2^nd February 2012, he was informed that the DNA report will be submitted to court in two weeks.

2. Police Inquiries & Court Proceedings

There are currently three police cases (B Reports) pending before the Magistrates Court (MC) in Puttalam (Mr. Razeek’s hometown) and in Pollonnaruwa (place of abduction) based on separate complaints by the Razeek family and CTF. The Puttalam MC case BR177/10 was filed on 16^th February 2010.  The Pollonnaruwa MC case AR 142/2010 had been filed by the police on 4^th March 2010. A further case B 651/11 was filed by the police on 13^th July 2011 to investigate the ransom calls made to the Razeek family following his disappearance.

From 16^th February 2010 until after the arrest of Nowshaadh on 9^th July 2011, Mr. Razeek’s family, the Puttalam Mosque Committee and lawyers and civil society groups campaigning for justice in this case, focused only on proceedings of the case before the Puttalam MC BR 177/10. However, there has been only one hearing of this case since  27^th July 2011 and the submissions on police investigations following the arrest of suspects Nowshaadh and Mushdeen, are being made to the Pollonnaruwa MC in case No.651/2011.

Police Case (B Report BR 177/10/P) pending before the Puttalam MC: Case filed by police on 16^th February 2010 based on the police complaint (No.CIB 01 389 / 187) filed by former CTF trustee Ms. Jensila Majeed to the Puttalam Police on 15^th February 2010.  In around May 2010 police identified Shahabdeen Nowshaadh, a former CTF employee, as the chief suspect in Razeek’s disappearance. Police linked Nowshaadh to the disappearance by tracing calls made from Razeek’s phone number to Razeek’s family after the disappearance. The calls were traced through the phone EMEI number to a phone registered to Nowshaadh. Nowshaadh filed an anticipatory bail application to the Puttalam Magistrates Court on 15^th June 2010. The court rejected his application on 23^rd June 2010 following which Nowshaadh filed a revision petition to the Puttalam High Court details of which are given below. There appears to have been no significant progress in this case until the arrest of the chief suspect Nowshaadh on 9^th July 2011. The last hearing of the case was on 17^th January 2012.

Anticipatory Bail (Revision Petition) (HCR 08/10) concluded in the Puttalam High Court: Following the rejection of his anticipatory bail application by the Puttalam Magistrates Court on 23^rd June 2010, Nowshaadh filed a revision petition to the Puttalam High Court  on 20^th October 2010, challenging the decision of the Magistrate not to grant bail.   In his petition, Nowshaadh admits to meeting Mr. Razeek on 11^th February 2010 and to being in the same area (Pollonnaruwa) at the time that Mr. Razeek disappeared. He also stated that he is a close aid of Minister Rishard Bathiudeen and that his arrest would harm the Minister. This case was dismissed on 28^th July 2011, following Nowshaadh’s arrest by the CCD on 9^th July 2011.

Police Case (B Report A.R 142/2010) before the Pollonnaruwa Magistrate Court:  Case filed by police on 4^th March 2010 based on complaint (CIB 02 33/175) filed by Mr. Razeek’s wife to the Mundalama Police on 12^th February 2010[i].  Proceedings in the B 651/2011 before the Pollonnaruwa MC states that the case (AR 142/2010) was filed by the Pollonnaruwa police regarding investigations carried out in Pollonnaruwa into the disappearance. Proceedings state that police recorded statements from several persons including those who travelled in the van with Mr. Razeek to Pollonnaruwa.

Police Case (B Report B 651/2011) before the Pollonnaruwa Magistrate Court:  B report filed by police on 13^th July 2011, to investigate ransom calls made to Mr. Razeek family, demanding LKR 20 million (approximately USD 170,000) to secure his release. This case is in addition to AR 142/2010 before the Pollonnaruwa MC.  Police submitted that Shahabdeen Nowshaadh and Musdeen had been identified as suspects in Mr. Razeek’s abduction.  On 26^th July 2011, the police submitted that Nowshaadh had made a statement to police that Mushdeen had told him that he had abducted and killed Mr. Razeek. The police also submitted a statement from Mushdeen that he had abducted Mr. Razeek in order to punish him for supporting the LTTE and that he had tied his hands, feet and face with a cloth and left him alone. When he returned 20 minutes later, he realized that Mr. Razeek had died. Mushdeen told police that he buried Razeek in an abandoned house belonging to his aunt in Vallaichchenai.  On 3^rd August 2011, the police submitted a report on the exhumation of a body believed to be that of Mr. Razeek in Vallaichchenai.

On 12^th August 2011, suspect Nowshaadh was produced before the Pollonnaruwa Magistrate and remanded to the Pollonnaruwa Remand Prison. Police submitted that samples of Mr. Razeeks’ body have been given to Gene Tech for DNA testing on 4^th August, 2011. Mr. Razeek’s son Rizkan had provided a blood sample to Genetech on 8^th August 2011. The contents of Razeeks stomach were sent to the government analyst on 5^th August 2011.  The van (no 59-6113) in which Mr. Razeek is believed to have been abducted had been taken into police custody on 1^st August 2011 in Kandy.  The police submitted that so far the investigations have revealed that several more people were involved in Mr. Razeeks abduction.

According to the lawyer representing the Razeek family, on 7^th September 2011 suspect Mushdeen was produced before the Pollonnaruwa Magistrate court and is currently in remand in the Pollonnaruwa Remand Prison.  The last hearing of the case was held on 2^nd February 2012. The next hearing is scheduled on 16^th February 2012.

Bail Application (Nowshaadh) (No. 77/2011) in the Pollonnaruwa High Court: Nowshaadh filed a bail application to the Pollonnaruwa High Court on 13^th October 2011 and was released on bail on 3^rd November 2011. Case concluded.

Bail Application (Mushdeen) in the Pollonnaruwa High Court: Lawyer for the Razeek family has informed us that Mushdeen filed a bail application to the Pollonnaruwa High Court on 2^nd February 2012. The next hearing of this case is scheduled for 16^th February 2012.

Land case before the District Court, Puttalam (No. 57913):  On 7^th December 2011, the Puttalam police filed a land case before the District Court Puttalam to resolve a land dispute between Mr. Razeek’s brother and Mr. M. Nihamath’s relatives who lived near Mr. Razeek’s residence in Mundalama. The next case date is due on 15^th February 2012. Mr. Nihamath’s relatives left the village following the exhumation of Mr. Razeek’s body out of fears for their safety. They have not returned to the village to date. Details of the dispute between Mr. Razeek’s family and Nihamath’s relatives are provided below.

3. NHRC Inquiry

The Razeek family filed a complaint with the NHRC on 15^th February 2011 (HRC/619/10).  There appeared to be no progress in the case until Riskhan was summoned to an inquiry on 4^th July 2011, over a year later. The Inquiry was conducted under no. HRC/621/10/I – iv. On 18^th July 2011, at a special meeting with the family and representatives of lawyers, Puttalam Mosque Committee and members of civil society, the chairman and commissioners of the NHRC committed to conduct the inquiry and to keep the family updated on any further developments in the police case.

At the NHRC inquiry on 26^th July 2011, the Inquiry Officer told Mr. Razeek’s son-in-law, a member of the Mosque Committee and a lawyer that the following a lead given by a suspect that Mr. Razeek’s body was buried in the Oddamvadi area in Vallaichchenai.

At the NHRC inquiry on 20^th September 2011, a CCD officer informed Riskhan and the lawyer that the CCD did not have evidence to arrest or question M. Nihamath in connection with Mr. Razeek’s abduction and killing. The CCD said that several witnesses put forward by the family had refused to make statements to the police. Riskhan told the police, that several CTF trustees and staff had not been questioned by the police and were willing to make statements. The NHRC offered to accept signed affidavits by CTF trustees and staff and submit them to the police.

However on 6^th October 2011, the NHRC refused to accept an affidavit by CTF founder trustees M.S. Rafeek, H.S. Firdous and Jensila Majeed regarding Nihamath’s involvement with CTF and Mr. Razeek’s disappearance and calling for a full investigation into the motives underlying Mr. Razeek’s abduction and killing. The affidavit was rejected on the ground that it did not include a statement that the affirmants would be willing to make statements to the police in this regard. The NHRC asked that an amended affidavit be provided on 12^th October 2011. However, the affirmants have been advised against submitting such a statement by their lawyers since it may impact their credibility as witnesses in the murder trial. There is no further date for the NHRC inquiry.

On 1^st February 2012, the Director of Investigations NHRC, informed a lawyer inquiring into the case, that three complaints had been filed with the NHRC regarding Mr. Razeek’s disappearance;

1. HRC/ 619/10 submitted by Mrs. Noormihar Razeek (Razeek’s wife) on 18^th February 2010
2. HRC 3170/10 submitted by Mr. A. M. U Jaufar (Razeek’s son-in-law) on 15^th September 2010 to the NHRC in Puttalam.
3. HRC 621/2010 submitted by the Executive Director of Forum Asia on 18^th February 2010 by post.

The Director of Investigations also said that the NHRC was keen to continue its inquiry in the case, but that proceedings had stalled due to the failure of Razeek’s family and lawyers to submit affidavits of witnesses who were willing to assist the police investigation in the case. The officer also stated that the failure to submit a DNA report was a matter in which the NHRC could intervene.

4. Meeting with the IGP: At a meeting held at the Defence Ministry on 23^rd August 2011to discuss violent incidents which took place in Puttalam following a Grease Devil attack, Mr. Razmi, Secretary of the Mosque Committee raised Mr. Razeek’s case with the Inspector General of Police (IGP) who was present at the meeting. He told the IGP that the Razeek case was being delayed and a credible investigation prevented due to the intervention of a prominent politician. He also said that there were tensions between the local community and the Northern Muslims over the Razeek case, Mr. Razeek being a member of the local Puttalam community. He asked the IGP to conduct effective inquiries into this case. The IGP told Mr. Razmi that he would look into the matter but no further information is available about what action has been taken to date by the Police.

5. Dispute with M. Nihamaths’ Relatives in Sameeragama

Shortly before Mr. Razeek’s funeral, Mr. Nihamath’s relatives who live in a land near Mr. Razeek’s home in Sameeragama, moved out of the village due to fears for their safety. When they tried to return to the village on around 6^th August, they were prevented from entering their compound by a group of villagers. Riskhan, Azam (Mr. Razeek’s son-in-law) and other family members were also present at the time. Following this altercation, Nihamath’s relatives filed a complaint with the Mundalama police accusing Mr. Razeek’s family including Riskhan and Azam and the villagers of assaulting them and preventing them from entering their home. That evening the police visited Mr. Razeeks home to inquire into the incident.

Razeek’s family informed the Puttalam Mosque Committee about the incident. Nihamath’s relatives also met with the Puttalam Mosque Committee and asked them to intervene in the case. The Puttalam Mosque Committee agreed to intervene, provided the police complaint against Riskhan was withdrawn. Following this the complaint was withdrawn by Nihamath’s relatives.

At a meeting with the Puttalam Mosque Committee and Razeeks’ family, at the Grand Mosque Puttalam, Nihamath’s relatives asked to be allowed to remove their belongings from the compound in Sameeragama. Mr. Razeek’s family said that they could not guarantee the safety of Nihamath’s relatives and asked that the matter be mediated with the villagers by the Puttalam Mosque Committee and the local Mosque Committees in Sameeragama and Perukuwattan.

On 13^th August 2011, a meeting was held at Mr. Razeeks’ home in Sameeragama with the Puttalam Mosque Committee, and the Sameeragama and Perukuwattan Mosque Committees to settle the matter. Following this meeting, Nihamath’s relatives were permitted to remove their belongings on 16^th August 2011.

To date, Nihamath’s relatives have not returned to the village. The land in which they were living, originally belonged to Mr. Razeek’s brother P.M. Mahroof who maintains that Nihamath’s family were allowed to occupy the land based on an agreement between Mr. Razeek and Nihamath. Mr. Mahroof states that he is the owner of the land and has refused to allow the family to re-occupy the land in Sameeragama.

On 21^st November 2011, Nihamath’s family filed a second complaint with the Mundalama police, naming 10 persons in the village including Riskhan as preventing them from returning to their home. Rizkhan and family members went to the police on around 28^th November 2011, Riskhan suggested that the matter be resolved through the Puttalam Mosque Committee. However since there is a dispute regarding ownership of the land, the police filed a case in the District Court, Puttalam on 7^th December 2011.  The case was last heard on 1^st February 2012 and the next hearing is scheduled 15^th February 2012. Pending a final determination in the case, a watcher has been placed in the compound by Nihamaths’ relatives.

6. Threats/Intimidation against the family and Mosque Committee

There have been no known threats against Mr. Razeek’s family or the Mosque Committee since the last update on 17^th August 2011.

However, at a meeting in Puttalam on 8^th December 2011, the mosque committee stated that Mowlavi Abdullah had received a threatening message from number +94773863256 on 12^th Januaary 2011, following a speech made by him to mark the Haj Festival at the Baka Mosque in Puttalam. In his speech, Mowlavi Abdullah stressed that the two communities must not be divided based on Mr. Razeek’s disappearances and that they must work together to defeat the elements which try to divide them. The message sent to Mowlavi Abdullah accused him of being a Muslim Prabhakaran who is trying to evict displaced Muslims from Puttalam. (This is being reported here for the record, as this was not included in the update of 17^th August 2011)

On 16^th January 2012, President of the Puttalam Mosque Committee, Mr. Muzammil was summoned to the office of the Assistant Superintendant of Police and asked to give a statement regarding the killing of policeman in Puttalam in August 2011 in a violent incident following a grease devil attack. Mr. Muzammil was told that a petition had been submitted by the Puttalam Organizer for Minister Bathiudeen accusing the Mosque Committee of inciting the violence in Puttalam on 21^st August 2011 which resulted in the killing of the policeman.

7. Summary / Conclusion:

It appears that the police have not made any significant progress in Mr. Razeek’s case. For several months the police failed to submit a post mortem report in the case. The lawyer for the family believes that a post mortem report was submitted to court but she has not been shown the report and the family has no further information on the progress of the investigation. It appears that the DNA report has not been submitted to court to date.

The date and method used to kill Razeek is not clear.

To the best of our knowledge, the police have made no move to apprehend or question several others implicated in the case including;

• Mr. Irshard, Parliamentary Secretary to Minister Rishard Bathiudeen, who stated publicly, in October 2010, that Mr. Razeek was held by the Defense Ministry;
• Persons travelling in the vehicle with suspect Musdeen, in which according to the suspect, Mr. Razeek was abducted;
• Persons travelling with suspect Nowshaadh, who admitted to meeting Mr. Razeek in Polonnaruwa on the day he disappeared. According to Nowshaadh, he and several others were travelling in a vehicle belonging to the Resettlement Ministry, headed by Minister Bathiudeen at the time;
• Minister Bathiudeen and Mustafa Nihamath, former CTF Trustee General and currently employed at the World Food Program in Colombo. The Razeek family and the Puttalam Mosque Committee believe that M. Nihamath is a key suspect in the case and that his involvement merits further inquiry.  Before the postmortem on 2^nd August 2011, Mr. Razeek’s son Riskhan clearly told the JMO that he believed M. Nihamath to be involved in his father killing. At Mr. Razeek’s funeral on 3^rd August thousands of those present chanted slogans calling for the arrest of M. Nihamath and Minister Bathiudeen.

8. Some key local & international appeals and statements

• The UN human rights office of the High commissioner, Briefing note on Sri Lanka and Malawi, Spokesperson for the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights: Ravina Shamdasani, on behalf of Rupert Colville, 29^th July 2011, available at, http://www.ohchr.org/EN/NewsEvents/Pages/DisplayNews.aspx?NewsID=11273&LangID=E
• Amnesty International, Urgent Action: Remains of Sri Lankan Defender Exhumed (Index Number: ASA 37/010/2011), 29^th July 2011, available at http://www.amnesty.org/en/library/asset/ASA37/010/2011/en/60e694d6-4055-4943-ae6d-2e2c2456f015/asa370102011en.pdf
• Front Line Defenders, Sri Lanka: ‘UPDATE – Arrest of chief suspect in the disappearance of human rights defender Mr. Pattani Razeek’, 12^th July 2011, available at, http://www.frontlinedefenders.org/node/15261
• Observatory (OMCT-FIDH), ‘Sri Lanka: Exhumation of a body suspected to be that of the forcibly disappeared Mr. Pattani Razeek’, 29^th July 2011, available at, http://www.omct.org/human-rights-defenders/urgent-interventions/sri-lanka/2011/07/d21358/
• The Asian Human Rights Commission (AHRC), The body of the disappeared human rights activist Pattini Razeek exhumed, 29^th July 2011, available at, http://www.humanrights.asia/news/ahrc-news/AHRC-STM-099-2011.
• The Asian Forum for Human Rights and Development (FORUM-ASIA), Sri Lanka: Ensure justice in the death of Pattani Razeek, 29^th July 2011, available at http://www.forum-asia.org/?p=10818

9. LLRC Report

The Report of the Lessons Learnt and Reconciliation Commission at page 162, specifically mentions the lack of police action in Mr. Razeek’s case[ii]. The Commission states that;

(Paragraph) 5.31 ‘Among the many disturbing allegations concerning missing persons submitted to the Commission by the general public, especially during its visits to conflict-affected areas, the case of Mr. Razik Pattani in Puttlam, is referred to here on account of the Commission’s own disappointing experience concerning that case. It highlights the deplorable absence of conclusive law enforcement action, despite the Commission itself bringing this case to the attention of the concerned authorities of the area. Mr. Razik’s body was reportedly discovered while the Commission was writing its report. Timely action could probably have saved this life.

(Paragraph) 5. 32 Mr. Razik who had been an official of an NGO providing assistance to the IDPs in Puttalam was abducted allegedly due to the fact that he had questioned the manner in which some of the expenditures have been incurred by the NGO as well as the purchase of some properties under the names of some of its directors. When inquires were made from the relevant Deputy Inspector-General of Police in the area as to why there was a delay in arresting the alleged abductor following a court order, he has reportedly said that the police was not aware of the suspect’s whereabouts and if the people know where he was, let the police know so that they could arrest him. It was alleged in this regard that the suspect evaded arrest due to his “political connections”. If this is established, it must be mentioned that such an attitude would completely erode the public confidence, in particular in the Police, and make the maintenance of law and order much more difficult. The Commission is equally concerned that undue political interference has also contributed to the lapses on the part of the Police.’

by Deanne Uyangoda and Ruki Fernando

• Who Killed Razeek?
• Manufacturing claymores in the Sinhala media – Media ethics withering on the vine
• The case of Jaseekaran and the Rule of Law in Sri Lanka
• The ‘Grease Devil’ Phenomena in Sri Lanka: A Brief Collation of Reports
• Mano Ganesan on his experience of the anti-Tamil riots in July 1983

From 19 – 27 May 2010, Groundviews ran a special edition on the end of war in Sri Lanka. Over this week alone, the site received over forty-thousand readers and exclusively featured over eighty-thousand words of original content, one video premiere, over a dozen photos, generating over one hundred and fifty-thousand words of commentary.

By popular request, The End of War in Sri Lanka: Reflections and Challenges, a compilation of content that appeared online in PDF form, was first released in May 2010. In mid-2010, it was published in print form. Today, we are relaunching the book as a free iBook on Apple iTunes. It is available as a direct download in 32 countries and regions, and readable on both the iPad 1 and 2 using iBooks. Ironically, Apple’s Sri Lankan iTunes store does not list the book, but you can easily download it to your Mac or PC using this link (138Mb iBook). Once downloaded, importing it to iTunes and synchronising it with your iPad is a cinch, and takes just a few seconds.

In his review of the book, Prof. Sasanka Perera, Professor of Anthropology and Head, Department of Sociology, University of Colombo, noted:

Therefore the pieces contained traverse a wide terrain that includes the rational, clinical, accommodating, hopeful, hope-less, post war scenarios of the future, politics of diasporas and so on… To me, that variation is the reality of our post war existence. Our experience is not linear; our perceptions not black and white across the board; our take on the past and the future not a monolithic reality. What is unfortunate is that the reality of this variation has not emerged in the popular and the dominant discourse on war, conflict and peace in the country.

Another review by Channa Wickremesekera, a military historian and novelist based in Melbourne Australia noted,

The most cursory glance at some of the websites that showcases opinions from those whose first language is truly Sinhalese will show that it is still the Wimal Weerawansa’s rather than Kalana Senaratne’s who make opinions of Sri Lankans, even in cyberspace. They are still dancing the victory dance, expecting the Tamil in the room to join in singing Sinhala bailas or to leave the room altogether… Groundviews, I am sure, has no pretensions to having the power to shift heaven and earth which is what, it appears at times, is required to change the direction the country is heading in. Yet, despite that seeming impotence, the collection of articles also presents a pleasing prospect. It shows that there are still at least a few of us who recognise that the end of the war has not ended the conflict as long as we do not deal with the Tamil in the room, fairly and justly. It may make a few other decent people stop and think, even feel. That would be a modest victory but a victory nevertheless.

The new iBooks edition of the book takes over 40 contributions, including high definition video and high resolution photography, and beautifully presents them on the iPad. Content automatically resizes for orientation, presenting text in a clear, crisp format. Photos by Aufidius, Deshan Tennekoon, Sharni Jayawardene and others can be viewed as thumbnails, and pop out in high resolution. Alongside the article by its producers who were the first to visit the Vanni after the end of the war, the trailer of the award winning documentary The Truth That Wasn’t There plays in high definition. iBooks on the iPad also offers the ability to annotate the text and easily email these notes (which Apple calls study cards). When connected to the Internet, each article has a link to access the online version, with all the comments generated still archived.

It is quite simply a new way to engage with content, and Groundviews is pleased to offer, for free, a book that is of enduring value to scholars, historians, political scientists and the average reader. Using poetry, prose, photography and video, The End of War in Sri Lanka: Reflections and Challenges for the iPad demonstrates the potential not just of the device and Apple’s iBook Author to bring content alive, but also the power of new media to present inconvenient truths in a compelling manner.

• Groundviews now formatted for iPad
• Sri Lanka’s and South Asia’s first citizen journalism iPhone app
• Long Form journalism: An invitation to contribute
• Launch of Groundviews 2.0: New features, enhanced readability, comprehensive search
• Send us content for publication

In this video, Prof. Harendra De Silva – one of Sri Lanka’s best known paediatricians – speaks about the challenges to child health and safety in Sri Lanka. Speaking about malnourishment, Prof. De Silva talks about the continued manifestation of malnutrition (referring to both under nourishment as well as obesity) among children, with one of the worst records on this score in the region.

Prof. De Silva also touches on the sexual abuse of children, focussing on the sexual abuse by members of the immediate or extended family, which is more prevalent that abuse by strangers, including foreigners. As noted on the web,

Discerning that a comprehensive and directed movement to prevent every kind of child abuse in Sri Lanka would not readily arise from among the few concerned non-government agencies and professionals, Professor de Silva doggedly pursued the need for immediate national level intervention. His efforts culminated in the founding of the National Child Protection Authority in 1999, the first of its kind in South Asia.

Noting that the biggest challenge to addressing sexual abuse is the denial in society, for example when the perpetrators of child sexual abuse are members of the clergy. The statistics are chilling. Prof. De Silva notes that his studies reveal that 10% of the male population in Sri Lanka admitted to having sex with a child. He goes on to reveal how child sexual abuse impacts adult life, and the effects of the psychological scarring as a result of abuse.

We also talk about the recent debacle where the National Child Protection Authority and the Police went after an Indian nun and the Sisters of Missionaries of Charity. As was noted in the media,

“The NCPA should have taken due regard of the confidentiality of the institution and in this particular instance it had been damaged,” said Father Noel Dias, senior attorney and Vice Judicial Vicar of the archdiocese of Colombo. “The arrest is illegal and the undue publicity given has caused immense hardship to the nuns concerned and also to the entire Catholic Church,” said Neville Abeyratne, a Catholic attorney who defended the nun. “The outcome of this case has proved that the sisters are doing a humanitarian service and they are not interested in taking any action against NCPA due to their mission to serve the needy,” said Abeyratne.

Prof. De Silva provides some insight into this case and the complexity of dealing with child trafficking and adoption. He also speaks on the enduring need for the protection of women who become pregnant after being raped.

• In conversation with Prof. Anil K Gupta: Grassroots innovation and development
• In conversation with Prof. Sumanasiri Liyanage
• The divide between Muslims and Tamils: Perspective of an IDP
• How hard is it to admit fault, Ambassador Wickramasuriya?
• In conversation with Joshua Roman: Videos and photos

Our affiliate Vikalpa did a short media monitoring exercise anchored to the front page reportage of the Indian Foreign Minister’s official visit to Sri Lanka and the press conference in which the President’s commitment to going beyond the 13th Amendment was reiterated by him. The following is a translation of the report that first appeared on Vikalpa.

In addition to the translation below, which deals with the Sinhala and Tamil media, it is interesting to note the differences in reporting the Indian FM’s statement regarding the 13th Amendment between the state-run Daily News and the privately owned Daily Mirror.  The Daily News does not have a single mention of the President’s avowed commitment to go beyond the 13th Amendment anywhere on the front page. The headline quoting the Indian FM, notes that the LLRC report is a basis for reconciliation. There is a photo showing the President, with both his hands, grasping the outstretched arm of the Indian FM. We use the same photo above. A story on how the President invited the Indian FM to Thai Pongal celebrations at the President’s official residence (Temple Trees) appears beneath this photo in the Daily News. There is no mention of any statement regarding the 13th Amendment, even in passing.

The Daily Mirror also does not go with a lead story on the President’s commitment to go beyond the 13th Amendment. Yet at the bottom of the front page, it publishes a lead story on this issue, noting that

“President Mahinda Rajapaksa has assured visiting Indian External Affairs Minister S.M. Krishna that the government would deliver on its promise to implement the 13th Amendment plus, Mr. Krishna told a news conference yesterday”. (Emphasis ours)

The story on the front page goes on to note that,

“Mr. Krishna said the Sri Lankan government hoped to extend the 13th Amendment to include a comprehensive devolution of powers”.

Given the media monitoring below, all government owned print media (and also pro-government print media like the Island newspaper) the day after the Indian FM’s press conference sought to downplay the President’s avowed commitment to go beyond the 13th Amendment. In some newspapers, there was simply no reportage on this vital pronouncement at all. For the Editors of the state owned Daily News and Dinamina and the privately owned yet pro-government Island for example, the President’s commitment to go beyond the 13th Amendment is a non-issue, or perhaps more accurately, so much of an issue that they seek to erase it from the front pages of their newspapers! 

Out of sight, out of mind is the government media’s mantra to deal with the 13th Amendment, and going beyond it. Could it also be this government’s real take on it?

Translation from the Vikalpa media monitoring article
A press conference was held in Colombo on 17 January 2012 at the end of an official visit by Hon. S.M. Krishna, the Indian Foreign Minister. The front page reportage of his statements on the 13^th Amendment in the mainstream Sinhala and Tamil print media are examined in this brief media monitoring report.

Lakbima, Lankadeepa, Divaina – Sinhala, private media
There is only one lead story featuring the comments by the Indian FM Krishna on the Sri Lankan government’s new stance regarding the 13^th Amendment. The daily Lakbima quotes the Indian FM and says in its lead story,

“The solution to the problems the Tamils face, the Sri Lankan government agrees to go beyond the 13 Amendment says the Indian Foreign Minister”

In addition to this quote, there are a number of other quotes attributed to the Indian FM flagged in this lead story.

• It is very important that the Sri Lankan government comes up with a political solution that addresses the problems of the Tamil people.
• President Mahinda Rajapaksa has already agreed to a political solution that goes beyond the 13^th Amendment.
• The President has expressed his commitment to going beyond the 13^th Amendment at a discussion centred around the devolution of power.
• There are a number of vital recommendations in the LLRC report, and enacting them is important for communal harmony and unity as well as reconciliation.
• It is important that the government continues with its efforts to engage with the Tamil National Alliance.

In addition to the above, the daily Lankadeepa featured a news story on its front page regarding the Indian FM’s comments, though it was not the lead story. It noted that,

“The President has promised a political solution that goes beyond the 13^th Amendment says the Indian FM.”

Note that the Lankadeepa states that the President had promised a political solution that goes beyond the 13^th Amendment to the Indian FM. Yet the Lakbima reports that the President only ‘agreed’ to go beyond the 13^th Amendment. Lankadeepa further notes that the President had expressed his commitment to a political solution on these lines to the Indian FM. Points that aren’t noted in the Lakbima front page lead story are featured in the Lankadeepa front page news story.

• That the time was now ripe for a stable political settlement not unlike the leadership shown to end the war.
• India is always keenly interested in what steps are taken towards a political settlement.
• The Sri Lankan government on a number of occasions had said it was committed to a political solution based on the 13^th Amendment.
• That India believes talks between the Tamil National Alliance and the government can be conducted under the guidance of a Parliamentary Select Committee.

In addition to this, the Indian FM’s press conference was also reported in the daily Divaina newspaper.

“The President said he will completely enact 13 says the Indian FM.”

The report also goes to the mention that the Indian FM had noted in the press conference that a political settlement is needed to address the Tamil problem, and that the devolution of power through the 13^th Amendment is appropriate in this regard. Further, the report mentions that over 90 minutes of discussion during the afternoon of the 17^th was spent between the Indian FM Krishna and President Rajapaksa discussing the Tamil problem and solutions to it.

Dinamina – Pro-government newspaper

Dinamina has also devoted its lead story to the Indian FM’s press conference. Interestingly, in the lead story published on the front page itself, there is no mention at all about the Indian FM’s statement regarding the 13^th Amendment. Most of the story is devoted to how the Indian FM had stressed that the LLRC’s reports recommendations are implemented. In addition, the lead story notes that Indo-Sri Lankan relations are strong, that the TNA-Government talks are a good thing, flags the Info-Sri Lanka MoU’s and that solutions for problems facing fisherman were also discussed. In addition, the front page carries a full colour, large photograph of the President and the Indian shaking hands, with the President grasping the Indian FM’s extended arm with both hands.

In fact, the paper incorrectly calls the Indian FM the Indian Foreign Secretary.

That the Indian FM mentioned one point regarding the 13^th Amendment during this press conference is mentioned in a single sentence in the lead story. However, even this single reference to the 13^th Amendment is published on the continuation of the front page lead story on page 4. It is published in the penultimate paragraph of the lead story. It reads,

“In addition, the Indian FM mentioned that he had met the President for successful talks and that he had expressed his idea for an amendment that went beyond the 13^th Amendment.”

When placed in the context of the lead story, this sentence is rendered rather meaningless, and at best is a prevarication over what the Indian FM said. That it comes right at the end of the lead story must also not be forgotten. The Dinamina notes that the President “expressed his idea” to go beyond the 13^th Amendment. Other Sinhala newspapers reported this as a commitment to go beyond the 13^th Amendment, or the completely implementing the 13^th Amendment.

Sudar Oli, Virakesari, Thinakkural – Tamil, private newspapers

The Sudar Oli newspaper has reported the Indian FM’s statement regarding the 13^th Amendment as its lead news story on the front page. The headline notes that “Ready to go beyond the 13^th Amendment: The President agrees with Minister Krishna”. The report goes on to note that the Indian FM had said,

He believes talks between the TNA and the government as well as the recommendations of a Parliamentary Select Committee would help in moving towards a political settlement.

That implementing the recommendations of the LLRC report was an important step to strengthen the government and build harmony.

Virakesari and Thinakkural go with similar lead stories on the front page. Virakesari goes with two colour photos on the front page to accompany the lead story. The continuation of the lead story on page 10 also occupies a lot of space on the page. In the Thinakkural, the lead story on the front page is entirely devoted to the Indian FM’s statement on the 13^th Amendment. In addition, the lead story quotes the Indian FM as noting that it is important to implement the recommendations of the LLRC report, the problems facing fisherman, development, the housing scheme in the North and the MoUs with Sri Lanka.

Thinakkaran – Pro-government newspaper

As flagged above, all the three privately owned Tamil newspapers reported the Indian FM’s statements as “going beyond the 13^th Amendment”. However, the Thinakkaran newspaper’s lead story reports that the President said he would exceed the 13^th Amendment (the Tamil phrasing suggests that this is just a little beyond the 13^th Amendment) for a solution. The lead story suggests that the Sri Lankan President had told the Indian FM that after discussing what is possible beyond the 13^th Amendment, a solution would be arrived at.

In addition, three key points are flagged in this news story.

• The signing of five MoU’s between India and Sri Lanka
• That the Indian government values the LLRC’s report
• That the Parliamentary Select Committee is a good platform for the solution of the national question

• Daily Propaganda
• Curated updates from Indian Foreign Minister’s official visit to Sri Lanka
• News Flash: I was not visited by a pink elephant
• In conversation with Dr. Jayampathy Wickramaratne
• Update on Menik Camp flooding: More images and reports from the ground

• Going beyond the 13th Amendment: Newspaper coverage of the Sri Lankan’s President’s assurance to India
• Interview with Prof. Tissa Vitharana on the 13th Amendment, Constitutional Reform, IT and English language
• Minister of what?????
• An exclusive interview with Eastern Province Chief Minister Pillayan after the TMVP’s arms decommissioning
• Has journalist J.S. Tissanaiyagam really received a Presidential pardon?

Alison Skilbeck will perform her critically acclaimed production Are There More Of You? in Colombo on the 13th and 14th of January at the British Council auditorium. Groundviews caught up with Alison to talk about her play and theatre in general.

As noted on the Oxford Playhouse website,

Alison Skilbeck was a member of Oxford University Dramatic Society (OUDS) and played lead roles at the Playhouse in many OUDS productions including King Lear, Epicene, The Plough and the Stars, Dandy Dick, and A Winter’s Tale, and toured to the Edinburgh Fringe in Oxford revue. Skilbeck’s enormously varied stage career has taken her to the West End and all over the UK, and on tour to the USA and Europe: early on she created roles in no fewer than six Alan Ayckbourn premieres at Scarborough. On radio she was ‘Polly Perks’ in the Archers until the character’s tragic death; while television credits include Sherlock Holmes, Miss Marple, The Beiderbecke Affair, Dr Who, New Tricks, Law and Order UK, and Midsomer Murders. Alison read Spanish and French at Somerville College, and her TV career began when she presented the Spanish Language Programme Zarabanda for BBC 2.

Alison is in Colombo performing for the benefit of Sunera Foundation, and begins by giving an overview of the production, which is anchored around four female characters who reside within the same postcode, SW11. Alison flags the real-life sources of her inspiration, and gives an overview of each character,

Claire, a bright, abandoned Ambassador’s wife with blood on her hands, Italian Sophia, who serves egg ‘n’ chips by day and osso bucco and Verdi by night, Sara, the local spirit weaver, all sweetness and light unless you tangle with her, and Sam a bluff northern business woman who’s always got on with men, but seems to be going home alone.

She goes on to talk about the reception of her production in the varied venues she has performed it to date, including at Fringe in Edinburgh. In response to a question posed, Alison then goes into briefly how theatre in Britain has changed in the decades she has been actively involved in acting, casting and directing. Towards the end of the interview, Alison more generally talks about the importance of theatre in Sri Lanka’s own tryst with reconciliation, post-war.

• The Gaza Monologues: An interview with Ruhanie Perera and Jake Oorloff
• Floating Spaces: Theatre and censorship in Sri Lanka
• The Travelling Circus on video: Looking at war and IDPs through theatre
• In conversation with Tracy Holsinger
• In conversation with Neluka Silva, Professor in English, University of Colombo

Prof. Gupta teaches at the Indian Institute of Management, Ahmedabad and was in Sri Lanka recently to deliver the first Ray Wijewardene Memorial lecture. Prof. Gupta is one of the world’s leading voices on social innovation, and the development of social capital. We began our conversation with Prof. Gupta defining what he sees as social entrepreneurship, and why it is important to recognise and nurture it. He then talks about the difference between big science and small science, and how the support of the former through national budgetary allocations does not necessarily address or strengthen the latter. Prof. Gupta also shares some insights into how grassroots innovation can be supported and through the blending of what he calls formal and informal sciences, development made more sustainable and equitable.

Prof. Gupta’s multi-disclipinary background holds him in good stead when he talks about the double-helix of language and culture, and how the preservation of one is to support the development of the other. He speaks of the knowledge rights of people and how at the grassroots, innovations that address common problems and shared socio-economic challenges exists that multi-national companies and even national governments are often unaware of. Prof. Gupta also has a rather unique take on Intellectual Property rights!

Given that so many today use the phrase ‘grassroots’, Prof. Gupta explains what it means to him, and notes that when he started to use the phrase, it was one that was rarely used or recognised.

Throughout the conversation, Prof. Gupta brings up a number of examples from India and elsewhere to support his argument that innovation exists in the unlikeliest of places, and that these innovations often have a broader applicability and in some cases, even push the frontiers of established science and technology. To listen to him is to realise the untapped potential of this innovation, and in fact, how much of it exists even in Sri Lanka. The other important point Prof. Gupta flags is that this innovation often exists amongst children and youth.

Towards the end, we talk about what impedes innovation of the kind Prof. Gupta’s most interested in. Prof. Gupta also ends with five key points, or lessons if one chooses to see them thus, on how a country can strengthen grassroots innovation, and why doing this is vital to its growth.

• Interview with Prof. Tissa Vitharana on the 13th Amendment, Constitutional Reform, IT and English language
• In conversation with Prof. Sumanasiri Liyanage
• Strengthening democracy in Sri Lanka: An open invitation to generate fresh ideas
• Democracy in Sri Lanka: Ideas and responses
• Ground realities in Jaffna and its environs: Two key perspectives

Sri Lankan photographer Devaka Seneviratne has some of the best photos on the web on the recently concluded night races held in Colombo for the first time. While Facades of Development: Of Commonwealth Games and Drag Racing at Green Path by Darini Rajasingham Senanayake is a critical take on events like this, it appears that going by the numbers present and the media coverage of it, this was a rather popular and well-attended event.

As one blogger recently put it “Both events [referring to the Electric Peacock Festival] are young people getting permits and stuff through the President’s sons, which is actually fine by me”. Such a wonderful, uncritical and simple model for post-war Sri Lanka’s democratic governance and equitable development. While we think this can and must be contested, the photos of the night races by Devaka give a sense of what to expect on the streets of Sri Lanka’s capital city in the years to come, and indeed, the country writ large. Don’t stop the party indeed!

See Devaka’s complete public album on Facebook here.

• In conversation with Dr. Paikiasothy Saravanamuttu
• Any inspiration Joanna?
• Voldemort rising
• The future of tourism in Sri Lanka: A conversation with Renton de Alwis
• Wishes for a peaceful and a happy New Year from the President

The official report of the Lessons Learnt and Reconciliation Commission was tabled in Parliament today. The official government site the report is available at is, at the time of writing, charitably put, doing very badly with the local and international demand for and interest in the report.

We managed to get a PDF of the report and mirror it online. Read it full screen here. Download a copy of the PDF here.

• Archive of Lessons Learnt and Reconciliation Commission (LLRC) submissions and media reports
• Final report of All Party Representative Committee (APRC)
• Petition against UN Panel’s report on accountability: Opposing what exactly?
• Law students write against 18th Amendment
• For the record: Full text of Supreme Court judgement on 18th Amendment

Translation of original in Tamil and released on behalf of the signatories. Read in full screen here.

A Public Memo to Members of Parliament representing the Tamil National Alliance from the Tamil Civil Society

Download the open letter as a PDF here.

• Sinhala and Tamil translations of UN Panel’s report on accountability
• An elephantine gestation: UN Panel’s report on accountability in Sri Lanka released
• Launch of Moving Images: Stunning documentaries and photo essays from Sri Lanka
• Mojo for mayhem or source of serendipity? Sri Lankan Army’s model to defeat terrorism
• Exclusive: Syllabi and timetables from compulsory University ‘leadership’ training course

Aside from articles appearing last Sunday in the Sunday Times and the Sunday Leader, mainstream media in Sri Lanka has been curiously silent over recent revelations in the British media on the government’s connections with the infamous British PR firm Bell Pottinger. On 6th December, The Independent ran a story on how Bell Pottinger had written the President’s speech to the UN after the end of the war in 2009. The article noted,

“Senior executives at Bell Pottinger told undercover reporters that they were so influential that they had written a key speech given by the Sri Lankan President to the United Nations.

During the address by President Mahinda Rajapaksa last year, which the company said was used in preference to one prepared by the Sri Lankan foreign ministry, the President suggested rules governing the humanitarian conduct of war should be re-examined. He also described his troops’ action against Tamil Tiger separatists as humanitarian.

President Rajapaksa also claimed in the speech that a Commission established by the government to look into the last years of the civil war, was giving ‘full expression to the principles of accountability’.”

A BBC report on the expose noted that “Bell Pottinger chairman David Wilson was secretly recorded as saying that Mr Rajapaksa had chosen the company’s version of the speech in preference to one drafted by his own foreign ministry”. The BBC report also flags that according to the Government’s own admission, Sri Lankan taxpayers have footed a bill of over 535 million rupees a year (US$ 4.7 million) to hire Bell Pottinger’s services to whitewash the country’s ignoble human rights record. Ironically, it is this same company that openly admits to undercover journalists from The Independent that the Government’s Lessons Learnt and Reconciliation Commission (LLRC) is fundamentally flawed.

As again noted by the BBC, the President’s media chief, Bandula Jayasekera (whose own ‘dark arts’ were flagged in web media after the CHOGM meeting in Australia), would not comment on the Independent’s report, dismissing it as a “scurrilous article” by the British media intended to “create trouble”. Unsurprisingly, there is no official comment from government to date on the sting operation’s video, which the Independent’s article was based on. The comments on Sri Lanka appear after around the 2:39 mark.

Bell Pottinger’s modus operandi to doctor information on the web and even go to the extent of creating and maintaining third party blogs that looked independent have raised the ire of Jimmy Wales, Wikipedia’s founder, and other more ethical PR firms. As Keith Trivitt, Associate Director, Public Relations Society of America avers,

“It’s not just that these tactics are unethical and potentially illegal. It is also that they are amateur, crude and very often do not work. Not only is it a disservice to a client for a firm to boast of its success with such outdated tactics, but it also takes the PR industry back several years in terms of our professionalism and value to businesses.”

Groundviews has over the years covered Sri Lanka’s dealings with Bell Pottinger and how, in one instance, the firm even sent out a Press Release on behalf of our Foreign Ministry from an employee’s email account. Read,

• Bell Pottinger and Sri Lanka: Millions spent for what?
• Bell Pottinger and official communiqués of the Sri Lankan government

For details of The Independent’s sting operation on Bell Pottinger click here. For the transcript of David Wilson’s comments on Sri Lanka, click here.

• Bell Pottinger and Sri Lanka: Millions spent for what?
• Bell Pottinger and official communiqués of the Sri Lankan government
• The state of tomfoolery: 2018 Comonwealth Games in Hambantota
• A response to “News websites caught red-handed doctoring video to make president look racist”
• Confusing reportage over comments by the President: Propaganda or fact?

Image from The Seventeenth Century Dutch Hospital in Colombo by C.G. Uragoda and K.D. Paranavitana

Being Poya with nothing much else to do, we strolled over to the newly restored and opened Old Dutch Hospital, which Colombo’s oldest building and now a shopping and dining ‘precinct’.

A plaque at the entrance notes that restoration work was done by the Army and that the project was basically the brainchild of the Secretary of Defense Gotabaya Rajapaksa, who as head of the Ministry of Defence also directly oversees the Urban Development Authority (UDA), responsible for a lot of the beautification of Colombo. This at times involves the bizarre and wanton destruction of the environment.

The Dutch Hospital restoration, however, is just beautiful. We don’t know when the Hospital premises were last open to and seen by the public, but it was only when restoration work began a few months ago (the area the Old Dutch Hospital is located in was heavily fortified and guarded during the war, given the close proximity of the Central Bank and World Trade Centre) that many first caught a glimpse of this heritage building. Work is still on-going at the rear and in many of the business establishments within the premises, but it’s now possible to amble around and admire the architecture and ambience of the edifice.

Image from The Seventeenth Century Dutch Hospital in Colombo by C.G. Uragoda and K.D. Paranavitana

The building is quite large, and the what’s most striking is the sheer thickness of the walls. This was a hospital, but it’s built like a fortress. Upon entering it, you forget you are in the very heart of Colombo. The World Trade Centre twin-towers are visible only when you look up and because the walls are so thick, there’s no sound of traffic in the courtyards or in any of the eating of shopping areas. Well-known names from Colombo’s retail, entertainment and catering sectors have set up shop, and a few more are under construction. The Ministry of Crab, clearly destined to become one of the places to go to and more importantly, to be seen at, is yet to open but ‘Work in Progress‘, a restaurant / coffee shop run by Hilton Colombo serves up a very interesting menu in a very nice space (the hanging lighting fixtures are particularly interesting!).

It’s quite hot during the day, but in the evening and night, this would be a wonderful space to relax and unwind. Since during lunch time the premises are bound to be packed with those from the surrounding offices, the best time to visit would be in the morning, late afternoon, or evening.

However, as much as the Old Dutch Hospital in Colombo is a tremendous draw to both tourists and locals alike, it is very sadly not the state of affairs in other parts of the country. In a city where public optics matter so much post-war, and social relations are still very strained with the heavy presence of the Army, recent reports in the media and by august groups like the Friday Forum suggest government servants and the military are engaged in the destruction of similar Portuguese heritage sites in Jaffna.

Tragically then, what is so wonderfully, and lovingly restored in Colombo is being irrevocably and vengefully destroyed in Jaffna. It just doesn’t make any sense. Beneath a veneer of development, these actions by government officials sow the seeds of future violence. The underlying politics of reconstruction in post-war Sri Lanka are vexed and not openly debated. Many, including us, will enjoy the beautiful and welcome space of the Old Dutch Hospital. Post-war, Colombo is looking, and indeed becoming, increasingly cosmopolitan. And yet, as we have flagged earlier, even in Colombo, no one dares question the plans of the MoD / UDA, or seek to know more about how things are done, which for governance and public accountability is even more important than how things look.

Forget that, and never mind how resplendent the Old Dutch Hospital in Colombo now looks, we seriously risk going back to those horrible years when its foundations would have rocked to the sound of truck bombs.

• People Reading Newspaper At Shop In Jaffna
• Cutting down trees to make Colombo beautiful?
• Inheritance
• Dealing with law and order as an issue of the Presidential elections
• Pecha Kucha: Celebrating creativity in Colombo

Put simply, The Incomplete Thombu by Sri Lankan Tamil artist T. Shanaathanan is, for us, one of 2011′s most compelling publications. It is art, but in the form of a book that deftly entwines it with architecture, drawing, the memory of loss and an eerily compelling exploration of what makes a home, a home by those who have left it behind, or lost it to the war. Short excerpts in the book by those who have lost their home are always poignant, sometimes humorous but never vindictive. There is a fragile, essential humanity to these stories that with a light touch reveals so much the war took away from residents in Sri Lanka’s Northern Province. There are 80 stories captured in the tome and they range in tone, identity, location and age. The drawings by the subjects themselves are very powerful depictions of loss – not just of property, but at times of hope itself. But in the stories there is also hope regained. Here we see facets of life before, during and after displacement that for those who haven’t experienced it, deeply humbling. Shanaathanan’s gifted ability to render in art the essence of each story makes the intensely personal more broadly appreciated, and you can spend hours flipping through this book, reading its contents and looking at the drawings.

Shanaathanan was born in Jaffna, Sri Lanka in 1969. He received his BFA in 1997 and his MFA in 2000 from the University of Delhi. In 2011 he completed his PhD at Jawaharlal Nehru University, New Delhi. He lives and works in Jaffna and is currently senior lecturer in Art History in the Department of Fine Arts, University of Jaffna.

Back cover of The Incomplete Thombu. Click here for larger image.

As noted on the Raking Leaves website, The Incomplete Thombu poses as a bureaucratic document file. Thombu was a term used by the Dutch to describe a public land registery, derived from the Greek tomos, from which the Latin word tome, or large book orginates. The Incomplete Thombu covers the subject of Tamil displacement during the civil conflict in Sri Lanka between 1983 and 2009. Though numerous documents of statistical data have recorded the displacement of civilians from the north and east of Sri Lanka, few have highlighted the personal plights of those involved. This project records the stories that removed civilians from their homes and the memories that they took with them. T. Shanaathanan examines the subject of displacement through a series of drawings that overlay ground plans of houses drawn from memory by displaced Tamil-speaking civilians, with architectʼs renderings and dry pastel drawings. The attempt to register one document on top of the other, maps out further displacements between what is remembered, what has been taken away and the stories left behind in a conflict that has torn apart its land and its people for over thirty years.

Groundviews caught up with the artist at the Saskia Fernando Gallery, where The Incomplete Thombu is on sale. The book is also on sale at the Barefoot Gallery in Colombo.

In this short interview, Shanaathanan speaks of the process of creating something that deals with trauma and loss. We asked him about the challenges of grappling with architecture and memory, as well as the architecture of memory. We ask the artist how in some of the professional architectural motifs, details not present in the original drawings are featured, and go on to ask him about the process of selection that led to the 80 stories captured in the book. Shanaathanan speaks of the politics of this work, and of his art in general, and also explores the idea of home (and its loss), which is a running theme through his work. He also explains how the book was bound and created in the manner it is.

Shanaathanan’s seven year old son, who had come to the gallery to see his father’s paintings, makes a cameo appearance in the video!

• Human displacement
• Sethu Samudram: Bridging art, history and human relations
• There is an urgent need for psychological assistance in the North
• The divide between Muslims and Tamils: Perspective of an IDP
• Jaffna: Moments of Nostalgia

We drove down to Galle today on the newly opened E01 road, more commonly known as the Southern Highway / Expressway. Setting off at 6.33am, we were in Galle at 7.45am, and setting off after a leisurely breakfast at around 9.45am, we were back in Kottawa around 10.45am. Many will take this same journey in the days and weeks ahead just to experience the road, Sri Lanka’s first highway. To be able to go to Galle and return in such a short time is, for those used to the 3 – 4 hours it takes along Galle Road, nothing short of incredible.

Our impressions of the journey follow along with some photos of E01.

The drive just before sunrise, weaving through countryside as day breaks is nothing short of spectacular. It is beautiful to the point of distraction, since though driving at over one hundred kilometres an hour demands complete attention on road conditions, the eyes are in constant competition with the pull of the scenery. The complete absence of any billboards and advertising is wonderful.

There is very little traffic on the road. And yet, the toll gates in Galle and Kottawa (the Colombo side entrance) struggle to deal with traffic. There is no automated toll system / lane, there are too few lanes at the toll booths, the ticketing is manually conducted and exiting the expressway takes time on account of the payment. These are bottlenecks, and will grow worse over time as traffic flows also increase. Doesn’t seem to be room for expansion of existing tollgates, but we hope there are some plans for enhancing and increasing them at every entry and exit point.

Road conditions from Kottawa to Nugegoda vary widely. The famous ‘debichchiya‘ on High Level Road remains a bottleneck, and though the road has been considerably widened on both sides, the Delkanda Junction is also a major bottleneck. The junction is currently under construction, adding to the delays. The Maharagama area is full of pedestrian traffic. The widening of the road from Maharagama to past the Pepiliyana Junction (up until the Nugegoda flyover) has been done without any consideration at all for a pavement. People are forced to walk on the main road, amongst cyclists, three wheelers and other faster moving traffic. The newly carpeted road is considerably high in some places from the ground and for the elderly, shopping laden pedestrians as well as cyclists, this is extremely dangerous. Though another was promised, the Nugegoda fly-over is still a rather small affair, with traffic from two lanes nudged to a single lane on it. Bus halts placed too close to it, coupled with the atrocious driving habits of private buses in particular, add to the congestion. At school times, traffic basically comes to a complete standstill in this area.

What all this essentially means is that travelling from the heart of Colombo to Kottawa will take, particularly during rush hours, far more time than travelling from Kottawa to Galle.

E01 clearly cuts through the countryside. This means that it cuts through areas previously inhabited by wildlife. It is unclear how effective measures to prevent wildlife from entering the road are successful. Even during the day, the animals on the highway are a life-threatening danger. This is a serious problem, and we do not recommend driving on the road at night.

We counted at least 50 dogs on the road going to and returning from Galle. They are on the driving lane and lounge as well as sleep on the overtaking lane. The highway undulates, and upon reaching a crescent, there are occasions when corrective measures to avoid running over a dog result in driving that can lose lives. The mist that enshrouded parts of the highway in the morning makes this worse. Dogs were seen crossing the road, lolling on the emergency lane and in between the road dividers, and darting across the highway.

In addition to dogs, there are sections of the highway were low flying birds almost hit the vehicle, suggesting that the highway is cutting through what may have been traditional nesting grounds. A photo above captures the problem – we weren’t able to make out what this bird was, but it just cut across the vehicle, which at the speed one travels in, is most disconcerting.

As another photo above shows, there are also sections of the highway where there are a lot of peacocks. They literally glide down from the cliffs alongside the road, and then meander across the highway.

We didn’t see any other wildlife (e.g. cows) but the abundance of stray dogs alone poses a risk we believe can lead to serious injury and even the loss of life if unchecked.

We noticed a number of vehicles stopped by the side of road with mechanical defects, suggesting that motorists keen to experience the new highway aren’t aware of the toll it takes on a vehicle at sustained high speeds.

Police presence was marginal. Those who were roadside seemed more interested in lane discipline than checking speed. We averaged around 110 – 115kmp/h. Many cars, including for some reason a large number of unregistered vehicles and those with garage plates regularly overtook us doing upwards of 140kmp/h. Even the Minister in charge of highways publicly stated he went on the road at 180kmp/h. It is unclear therefore whether the stipulated speed is going to be strictly enforced. The road itself allows for higher speeds, but encountering a stray dog at this speed is not a physics experiment we are inclined to try or experience.

There is no signage at all with emergency telephone numbers, so if you do get stuck and need help, it’s not at all clear to dial 1969, which is the highway’s dedicated emergency hotline.

The emergency lane / hard shoulder seems far too small, and is barely wide enough for a family sized car, leave aside a larger SUV. The road itself lacks adequate rest areas for drivers to rest. Microsleep at high speed kills, and its unclear why there are so little places for R&R.

Google Maps does not feature E01. We don’t know if local satellite navigation devices and databases (e.g. Dialog SatNav) have been updated with the road either.

E01′s greatest achievement is not so much in the engineering of the road, but in its ability to make Sri Lanka smaller and more easily accessible. We imagine the road will be extensively used during the up-coming Galle Literary Festival. But aside from this, the gastronomical delights of Spaghetti & Co in Hikkaduwa to the beauty and diversity of Galle Fort now feel closer, more easily reached. It’s a great and welcome development.

Photos of the highway from Kottawa to Galle

Photos of the highway from Galle to Kottawa

• Terraffic
• Bus Terrorism and Justice
• Review of ‘Right of Way: A journey of resettlement’
• For a quieter Colombo – Ban the bus horns!
• Colombo: Under Siege?

Over the weekend, a press release issued by the Director General of the Department of Government Information noted that all ‘websites carrying any content relating to Sri Lanka or the people of Sri Lanka… uploaded from Sri Lanka or elsewhere’ to ‘register’ for ‘accreditation’. Several websites Websites including www.lankanewsweb.com, www.srilankamirror.com, www.srilankaguardian.org and www.lankawaynews.com were blocked on the day the press release was issued.

Web censorship has grown apace since 2007, when the pro-LTTE Tamilnet.com was first blocked, without any court order. The following Bundlr collection flags some key incidents and concerns regarding the growing censorship of online expression and content. It is also a record of how supine Internet Service Providers (ISPs) are in Sri Lanka when complying with arbitrary orders issued by the government for the blocking of websites.

We will continue to curate this bundle with new developments.

• Checkmate, Rajapakse! The UN Report, Militarism and Public Religion in Sri Lanka
• The Stop Internet Piracy Act (SOPA) and the Protect IP Act (PIPA): What implications for Sri Lanka?
• Groundviews on Twitter
• Groundviews blocked in Sri Lanka (Updated)
• Long Form journalism: An invitation to contribute

TED Fellow and gifted cellist Joshua Roman was in Sri Lanka recently for his debut concert in Colombo. He also performed in Kandy. Cellist Yo-Yo Ma called him an “extraordinary young musician”. Those who came to listen to him play in Colombo and Kandy, accompanied by Eshantha Peiris on the piano, left richer for having experienced his music.

As with Mandhira de Saram, Joshua started playing an instrument very young, at age three. Joshua speaks about his family’s influence on his music, and choice of instrument. We also talk about the cello he brought to Sri Lanka, which made in 1899, was perhaps the oldest western musical instrument to ever grace the stage at the Lionel Wendt and the venue in Kandy.

Joshua speaks about his approach to music, and how though trained and obviously adept at playing classical music, he always tries to experiment and likes to play contemporary music as well. This brings us to the question of how and to what extent the audiences Joshua plays to influence his selection of music, if at all. Joshua opines that an audience may not have to like the music played, but that it is the role of the musician to take them on a journey through soundscapes both familiar and new, to connect with an audience, to take them by the hand and guide them through the traditional classical cannon and at the same time introducing them to the new and contemporary.

Joshua also talked about how he developed his style of playing, anchored to the music he played and listened to as a child. He then speaks about the time he played in Uganda’s IDP camps, noting how people there connected immediately and in a novel manner with the classical music he played. He connects this to the possibility of using music in reconciliation processes, including in Sri Lanka.

Joshua also talks about his relationship with the web and the Internet, and how both are helping him create a community of listeners who tune in to what he plays, and hopefully, more of the same online.

Photos of his concert in Colombo can be seen here, and the one in Kandy, here. They are also embedded below.

• Joshua Roman in Sri Lanka
• In conversation with Mandhira de Saram
• Lionel Bopage: Evolution of the LTTE and Prabhakaran’s role in the Tamil nationalist struggle
• In conversation with Iranganie Serasinghe: Environmentalist and cinematic icon
• Song of the Sleepless River: Music, racism and resistence

The Ministry of Higher Education has issued a directive that all state universities should hire the services of Rakna Lanka Ltd for provision of security services. The undersigned of the University academic community considers that directive to be in complete contravention of the norms and conventions by which universities are expected to function.

The letter issued by the Secretary to the Ministry of Higher Education seeks to bypass standard procedures that are followed in the university system in the hiring and outsourcing of services. That process requires tenders to be called for and for a suitable company to be selected in a transparent and independent manner. The Secretary’s instruction therefore is in violation of established processes and is contrary to the underpinning principles of governance and the autonomy of academic institutions.

Rakna Lanka is held out to be a government owned commercial security venture and has been set up under the Ministry of Defence, under the direct supervision of the Secretary to that Ministry. The website of Rakna Lanka states that only ex-servicemen are hired by the company. The website also provides a list of other state owned departments that have hired the services of Rakna Lanka.

Internationally, privatization of security has been debated on intensely owing to the sensitive nature of what is termed as “security” and how such “security” is maintained. Experiences in other parts of the world suggest that accountability should be increased in the maintenance of security, not decreased. In that light, the directive by the ministry that all security in all state universities should be handed over to one commercial enterprise owned by the state, coming under the supervision of one public officer, becomes problematic. Holding such an entity accountable to the university authorities could, predictably, become difficult.

It is important that universities retain their independence in matters of hiring and recruiting, tailored to suit the individual needs of each university. The authorities should abide by just and fair procedure, engage in dialogue and consultation with the University community, and give due recognition to the positions occupied by University authorities, the Vice Chancellors and others in these matters. It is of the utmost importance that university autonomy is preserved under such circumstances.

We are also concerned about the increasing infringement of university autonomy in matters pertaining to academic programmes and in decision making by the state. We are especially concerned about the role the military establishment is increasingly playing in the administrative and academic spheres of the universities, which are a place of free exchange of ideas, critical thinking, and innovation. We of course have in mind the leadership training programme conducted by the Military to university entrants, which, arbitrarily imposed on all concerned, reduced the authority of the academic community within its own area of purview. This last development of encroachment via hiring procedure by the Ministry of Defence is seen as a further elaboration of this trend of increasing militarization of the universities.

As an academic community we are willing and able to cooperate effectively with the authorities in these and other issues facing university administration and academic quality. We urge the government to respect its obligations toward the academic community and the universities with respect to its written and unwritten contract with the university system.

Signed

1. Ranil Abayasekara, University of Peradeniya
2. Harini Amarasooriya, Open University of Sri Lanka
3. Suresh de Mel, University of Peradeniya
4. Sampath Deegalla, University of Peradeniya
5. Noel Dias, University of Colombo
6. Priyan Dias, University of Moratuwa
7. Lesly Ekanayake, University of Moratuwa
8. Primal Fernando, University of Peradeniya
9. Lakshman Galagedara, University of Peradeniya
10. Ranil D. Guneratne, University of Colombo
11. Camena Guneratne, Open University of Sri Lanka
12. Dileni Gunewardena, University of Peradeniya
13. K. R. B. Herath, University of Peradeniya
14. S. R. Herath, University of Peradeniya
15. Rohini Hewamanna, University of Colombo
16. M. I. M. Ishak, University of Peradeniya
17. Janaki Jayawardena, University of Colombo
18. Romaine Jayewardene, University of Colombo
19. Danesh Karunanayake, University of Peradeniya
20. Parakrama Karunaratne, University of Peradeniya
21. Dulakshi Karunasinghe, University of Peradeniya
22. Gamini Keerawella, University of Peradeniya
23. Manikya Kodithuwakku, Open University of Sri Lanka
24. L. C. Kurukulasuriya, University of Peradeniya
25. Amal Kumarage, University of Moratuwa
26. Shamala Kumar, University of Peradeniya
27. Darshana Liyanage, University of Ruhuna
28. Sanjeeva Maithripala, University of Peradeniya
29. K. P. P. Pathirana, University of Peradeniya
30. A. L. M. Mauroof, University of Peradeniya
31. R. Meegaskubura, University of Peradeniya
32. Nilhan Niles, University of Moratuwa
33. Rathnamali Palamakumbura, University of Peradeniya
34. Susantha Pathirana, University of Peradeniya
35. Asoka Perera, University of Moratuwa
36. Nimal Ratnayake, University of Peradeniya
37. Rohan Ratnayake, Open University of Sri Lanka
38. Asanga Ratnaweera, University of Peradeniya
39. Dinesha Samararatne, University of Colombo
40. Gameela Samarasinghe, University of Colombo
41. I. M. S. Sathyaprasad, University of Peradeniya
42. Kalinga Tudor Silva, University of Peradeniya
43. M. Sitralega, Eastern University
44. Upul Sonnadara, University of Colombo
45. Sumathy Sivamohan, University of Peradeniya
46. Ruvan Weerasinghe, University of Colombo
47. Carmen Wickramagamage, University of Peradeniya
48. B. Dileepa Witharana, Open University of Sri Lanka

Dated: Sept 21, 2011

• University academics: Statement on the Proposed 18th Amendment to the Constitution
• Training for University Entrants in Army Camps and at District Level
• Militarisation of Sri Lanka and its infiltration into Higher Education
• What Is The Future Of The Eastern University?
• A turn for the worse? Undergraduate protests and unrest in Sri Lanka

[Editors note: Also read JAFFNA: BRUTAL ASSAULT OF CIVILIANS IN NAVANTHURAI and The attack on TNA Parliamentarians in Jaffna: A timeline of outrageous denials (Updated)]

These days, the Sri Lankan Army appears to be somewhat bored. Despite increasing post-war forays into urban development, vegetable transportation and tourism – wonderfully captured in this cartoon – the Army appears to, unsurprisingly, seek more exciting peacetime pursuits. Fortunately, this appears to be quite easy in post-war Sri Lanka, where there are plenty of Tamils to expend excess testosterone on, who as an added bonus, are eternally grateful to the Army for eradicating terrorism and very unlikely to raise too much of a ruckus.

A detailed report of the violence in Navanthurai was posted on this site a few days ago. Tamil media now report even more heinous violence from the North, framed by growing fear on the ground over the ‘grease devil’ phenomenon. As T. Aruna notes in You Can’t Catch A Bogeyman,

“The reactions to the ‘Grease Yaka/Mystery Man’ by communities and the State have largely led to increased violence and tension. Vigilance groups have assaulted suspects, damaged property and taken lives. The armed forces have responded with lethal force against protesting mobs, but also have beaten scared villagers and threatened community leaders in their attempts to quell fears – with quite the opposite effect.”

The report that follows is translated from a front page lead story that ran in the Virakesari on 2 September 2011. It is difficult to grasp the level of violence with impunity noted here, which lays waste to pronouncements of glib government officials who suggest Sri Lanka is well on its way towards reconciliation.

###

The Grease Devil comes to Kokuvil: Damage to a bus, Army attacks the public, two grievously hurt

Virakesari, 2 September, Front page lead story

A bus going to Jaffna from the South was attacked by the public after two persons, suspected to be ‘grease devils’, got on to it. Army personnel who arrived on the scene rounded up the men from surrounding houses and severely beat them up suggest reports coming from Kokuvil. This incident occurred around 7.30pm on 31st August. Two of the most seriously injured were left behind and 26 were arrested and handed over to the Police.

Further details are as follows.

The area around the Kalvari Kovil, adjacent to the Kokuvil main road that extends to the Kokuvil Train Station, was in turmoil after women had raised concern over two individuals (‘grease devils’) after whom the residents of the area had given chase. The two suspect ‘grease devils’ had got on to a stationary bus parked on the Kokuvil Road. Seeing them get in, the crowd giving chase had attacked the driver asking him to take the bus away from the location. The bus summarily left towards Jaffna and the residents went back to their homes.

Around three hours after this incident, the Army who arrived with the Police broke down the doors of houses and dragged out the men. They had then taken the men to the Kalvari Kovil main road and beaten them up severely with wooden poles, questioning them at the same time on who damaged the windows of the bus.

Two men, selected from the group who were beaten up, were taken away, their t-shirts removed and Army helmets put on them. They were then laid on the road. Four army personnel per man held them down. Their faces were then kicked. Their knees and their legs were attacked by baton poles. Worried that they had killed the two men, the Army abandoned them near a thicket close by and left.

The 26 taken to the Police had been beaten up again without clothes. Only afterwards had statements been taken from them. They had been beaten up from around 11pm, the time they were taken, to around 3am the day after. After keeping two behind to ostensibly produce in front of the Courts, the rest were released around 8am. Ganapathi Pillay Subashkaran (24) one of whom were beaten up by the Police can no longer walk on account of the trauma suffered at the hands of the Police. He had only recently returned to Sri Lanka. Subashkaran had been taken to the Jaffna hospital for further treatment in chains and with Police guard. The Police had pressed him to say that his injuries had been sustained on account of a fight with a ‘grease devil’.

The two individuals who had been abandoned by the Army in the thicket near the Kalvari Kovil were admitted to the Jaffna hospital around 2am. The bones of one person’s leg were broken. Both suffer grave chest and hand injuries, hospital sources say.
As this group was being attacked, a Policeman had noted that this was done on orders given to take revenge on the incident that occurred a few days ago in Navanthurai.

In addition to this, the Thinnakkural newspaper on the 2nd noted that the Army had threatened Tamil people that if Sinhalese from the South were attacked, they would retaliate by attacking the Tamils in Colombo.

###

Scan of the Thinakkural newspaper story

Download larger version here.

###

Original story in Virakesari

• The ‘Grease Devil’ Phenomena in Sri Lanka: A Brief Collation of Reports
• JAFFNA: BRUTAL ASSAULT OF CIVILIANS IN NAVANTHURAI
• De-greasing social speculation over “grease devils” in Sri Lanka: Part II
• Grease Devils and Police and Army attacks on civilians in Mannar and Vavuniya
• Sharing a common god: The Sivasubramaniam Kovil in Slave Island

The main points expressed by the Collective were the following:

- The State has an obligation to ensure the protection of women, to set about establishing impartial investigations and strengthen law enforcement, particularly with respect to the ability of the police to maintain law and order.
- “If women are insecure, it is also an indictment on the community and our society at large. We want law enforcement to work closely with communities and strengthen mechanisms that would ensure safety of communities”.
- It is necessary to avoid the “policing of women in the guise of dealing with this issue”, particularly to prevent restriction or confinement. This is important in order to recognise that women have responsibilities and assume an important role in their respective families and communities.
- Comprehensive investigations are required to prevent the repetition of incidents.
- The need to build confidence within our communities and for elected representatives to engage with their constituencies.
- The media has a responsibility to avoid sensational reportage and reduce levels of hysteria.
- The need for communities to work with law enforcement agencies in a manner that strengthens community trust.

Women and Media Collective Press Conference – 17th August 2011 from Centre for Policy Alternatives on Vimeo.

• Violence Against Women and Girls in Sri Lanka: No April Fools joke
• Gender and Journalism
• Going beyond the 13th Amendment: Newspaper coverage of the Sri Lankan’s President’s assurance to India
• Speech by Justice P N Bhagwati at the IIGEP’s final press conference
• Women on Top: Sexuality and rights in Sri Lanka

Funeral of Pattani Razeek | Photo courtesy of Deutsche Presse Agentur

Mr. Pattani Razeek’s case is a rare instance where the body of a disappeared person has been found, based on information given by arrested suspects. The arrest of key suspects is itself a rare occurrence in the thousands of disappearance cases in Sri Lanka. It is even more unusual that people connected to a Minister in the ruling regime would be arrested for a serious crime.

Razeek’s case had generated mass outrage in his home district of Puttalam. Since the disappearance, protests, signature campaigns, posters and leaflet campaigns were conducted. The family and local Muslim leaders played a prominent role in the campaign. Their efforts were supported at the national level by Razeek’s friends and colleagues, who monitored the investigation and court proceedings, the exhumation, post mortem process and the funeral. 62 Sri Lankan civil society activists including Buddhist and Christian clergy, senior lawyers, academics, media personnel and human rights defenders signed a statement calling for justice in this case.

Razeek’s case also generated international outrage and concern. Many regional and international human rights organizations such as the Asian Centre for Progress of People, Asian Federation Against Enforced Disappearances, Asian Human Rights Commission, Amnesty International, FORUM-ASIA, Frontline Defenders, Minority Rights Group and the Observatory to Protect Human Rights Defenders took up Razeek’s case. The United Nations Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) in Geneva also made a public call for justice on the case.

On the day of the funeral, shops were closed in Razeek’s hometown Sameeragama and the district capital Puttalam and other nearby towns in protest. Black and white flags were displayed throughout the town as well as banners condemning the abduction and killing and calling for the perpetrators to be brought to justice.  Media reports estimated that between 5000 – 7000 people attended the funeral. The outrage expressed at the funeral was particularly directed at Minister Rishard Bathiudeen and former Trustee General of CTF, Mr. Mustafa Nihamath, with thousands chanting slogans calling for their arrest.

Key concerns:

The unwillingness of the Police to question or arrest the chief suspect, Nowshaadh, who was identified by the Police as early as May-June 2010,  has raised concerns about political interference in the case. This was fuelled also by statements by the chief suspect himself, admitting his close connections to Minister Bathiudeen. After a major local, national and international campaign marking 500 days since the disappearance of Razeek, Nowshaadh and another suspect Musdeen were arrested in July 2011 and the body was exhumed based on information provided by Musdeen.

However, it appears that the Police have made no further move to apprehend or question several others implicated in the case including;

• Mr. Irshard, Parliamentary Secretary to Minister Rishard Bathiudeen, who stated publicly,  in October 2010, that Mr. Razeek was held by the Defense Ministry;
• Persons travelling  in the vehicle with suspect Musdeen, in which according to the suspect,  Mr. Razeek was abducted
• Persons travelling with suspect Nowshaadh, who admitted to meeting Mr. Razeek in Polonnaruwa on the day he disappeared. According to Nowshaadh, he and several others were travelling in a vehicle belonging to the Resettlement Ministry, headed by Minister Bathiudeen at the time.
• Minister Bathiudeen and Mustafa Nihamath, former CTF Trustee General and currently employed at the World Food Program in Colombo, whose involvement in key aspects of the case merits further inquiry.

It remains to be seen who actually abducted and killed Razeek, and importantly, who pulled the strings and masterminded the actual crime and the cover up.

It is extremely disturbing to note the delays and reluctance by the police, to question or arrest persons who it is reasonably believed, could shed some light on the abduction and killing of Mr. Razeek. Rumors that one or even both the suspects might be released due to political pressure, has renewed doubts that an independent investigation will proceed towards prosecutions and convictions.

Different views have been expressed about whether tensions between the displaced Northern Muslims and host community in Puttalam were a factor in Razeek’s killing. Key Muslim leaders from the host community, who led the campaign for justice despite threats and intimidations, have claimed that tensions between the communities are a factor in the case. Razeek is from the host community and was the only senior and prominent leader in CTF from the host community, while the chief suspect and others implicated as being involved in the case are all from the Northern Muslim community or known supporters. Northern Muslim leaders have however asserted that this case has nothing to do with the tensions between the two communities. Despite the polarization, it is our view that the present situation provides a unique opportunity for both communities to work together by joining hands to fight for justice for Razeek’s case in a proactive manner, particularly by calling for arrest and questioning of all those implicated or believed to have information. During the funeral, Mowlavi Abdulla stressed the importance of unity between the two communities and called on the Northern Muslims to help the struggle for justice regarding Razeek’s case. A positive and proactive response by Northern Muslim leaders and the community towards this call would be a key factor that could help reduce tensions between the two communities.

It is also not clear whether the takeover of CTF by the Ministry of Defense in June 2011, following complaints by Minister Bathiudeen, is linked to Razeek’s case. The many questions raised during the inquiry about Razeek’s disappearance, the timing and the fact that the inquiry conducted by the Ministry of Defense was based on a complaint by Minister Bathiudeen has led to speculation that there is indeed a link between the two.

After Razeek’s disappearance and even after his funeral, attempts have been made to divert attention from key issues related to the disappearance, killing and investigations, by a stream of anonymous emails and documents,  sent to local and international groups concerned about Razeek’s case, alleging that Razeek and CTF were corrupt and questioning whether Razeek was indeed a human rights defender.

It is in this context that we feel that it is crucial for authorities and all concerned groups and individuals to focus on addressing the crucial and fundamental issue of who abducted and killed Razeek and ensure that the perpetrators are brought to justice through a speedy an independent investigation and judicial process.

Background facts on the case:

Mr. Pattani Razeek, born in January 1955, was a well known human rights defender in Sri Lanka and Asia. At the time of his disappearance, Mr. Razeek was the Managing Trustee of the Community Trust Fund (CTF) (www.ctfsrilanka.org) and was an Executive Committee Member of the Asian Forum for Human Rights and Development (FORUM-ASIA) (www.forum-asia.org). Mr. Razeek had also served as a Grama Seweka (Village Government Official) in the Puttalam district.

Description of Disappearance:

Mr. Razeek was last seen near the Jumma Mosque in Kaduruwela, Polonnaruwa (a town in the North‐Central Province of Sri Lanka) at around 3.30 pm on 11^th February 2010. Mr. Razeek was travelling with CTF field staff, when he met a group of people in a van parked behind the Jumma Mosque in Polonnaruwa.  Mr. Razeek approached the group and exchanged greetings in Arabic, indicating that they were Muslim. Mr. Razeek subsequently got into the van, with the group, having told his colleagues that he would be travelling to the Eastern town of Valaichchenai and that he would return to Polonnaruwa the following day.

Calls to Mr. Razeek’s Family, Trustees and Friends

Shortly after Mr. Razeeks’ disappearance, his family and CTF trustees began to receive repeated calls from the abductors using Mr. Razeek’s mobile phone number. The abductors ordered CTF to continue paying Mr. Razeek’s phone bill if they wished to maintain contact with him. Between February and June 2010 the family and trustees received many calls demanding;

• that Rs.20 million be paid as pocket money to the abductors;
• CTF be closed down immediately; and
• the family provide details of CTF assets and that the trustees transfer any properties held in their name to the ‘Nujoom Trust’ a trust set up by Mr. Nihamath (the former Trustee General of CTF) in 2009.

In March 2010, Ms. Rifana, a former CTF employee and close associate of Mr. Razeek, received a call demanding that CTF be asked to pay Rs. 1 million as pocket money to the abductors. Rifana filed a complaint regarding the call with the Puttalam police. The abductors also diverted calls made to Mr. Razeek’s phone from 18^th – 24^th February 2010 to Rifana’s phone number.

CTF and the family agreed to pay the abductors provided they were allowed to speak to or see Mr. Razeek.  On 3^rd April 2010, the family was asked to collect a parcel by the abductors. The parcel which was collected on 4^th April 2010 from the Gunasinghapura Mosque in Colombo, contained Mr. Razeek’s spectacles, keys, watch, driving license, Grama Seveka identity card, bike license and insurance.  These items were sent as proof that Mr. Razeek was being held by the abductors.  On 5^th April 2010, Mr. Razeek’s phone number was disconnected due to non-payment of the bill by CTF. On 11^th April 2010 the family was asked to collect a parcel from the Wattala Mosque, which contained 2 SIM cards. The family was asked to keep one SIM to communicate with the abductors.  The second SIM was to be given to former Trustee of CTF, Mr. Nihamath, who refused to accept it stating that he did not wish to be involved with CTF or Razeek’s disappearance.

The calls temporarily ceased between June and August 2010. On around 15^th August 2010, the family began to receive calls demanding a ransom of Rs.10 million for Mr. Razeek’s release. On 6^th September 2010, the family agreed to pay the ransom but asked to see or speak to Mr. Razeek before the money was paid.  From 6^th September 2010, the calls to Mr. Razeek’s family, friends and CTF trustees abruptly ceased.

Police Inquiry and Court Proceedings

Mr. Razeek’s family lodged complaints with the Police in Mundalama (place of Mr. Razeek’s residence) on February 13, 2010 (no.CIB 02 33/175). CTF lodged complaints with the police in Polonnaruwa on February 14, 2010 (no. MOIB 113/313) and in Puttalam on February 15, 2010 (no.CIB 01 389/187). On February 16 2010, the police filed a case bearing no BR177/10/P in the Puttalam Magistrate Court.

Since the initial complaint, Mr. Razeek’s family has filed several further complaints and statements to the Mundalama, Polonnaruwa and Puttalam police, regarding Mr. Razeek’s disappearance and the ransom calls and threats made against the family.

A Police B report submitted to the Puttalam Magistrates Court around May-July 2010 has identified Mr. Shahabdeen Nowshaadh, a former CTF employee, as the chief suspect in Mr. Razeek’s disappearance. The police have evidence linking Nowshaadh with Mr. Razeek’s disappearance including calls made to Mr. Razeek’s family, on Mr. Razeeks mobile phone number, after his disappearance. The police traced these calls, through the phone EMEI number to a phone registered to Nowshaadh. In his anticipatory bail application, Nowshaadh admits to meeting Mr. Razeek on 11^th February 2010 and to being in the same area (Polonnaruwa) that Mr. Razeek disappeared.

Nowshaadh filed an anticipatory bail application to the Puttalam Magistrates Court on 15^th June 2010. The court rejected his application on 23^rd June 2010. Nowshaadh filed a revision petition in the Puttalam High Court on 20^th October 2010, challenging the decision of the Magistrate denying him anticipatory bail. This case bearing no.HCR 08/10 was dragged before the High Court for 9 months until 28^th July 2011, by which time Nowshaadh had been arrested and was in the custody of the Colombo Crimes Division (CCD).

Despite having identified the chief suspect as early as May/June 2010 the police made no real attempt to apprehend or question Nowshaadh for over a year. On 11^th December 2010, the case was transferred from the Puttalam police to the CCD, following protests by Mr. Razeek’s family and community leaders in Puttalam. However there was no move to arrest Nowshaadh despite information provided by the family and community leaders to the police as to his whereabouts. During this time, Nowshaadh was reported to have moved around freely and has been seen at public events in the presence of Minister Bathiudeen. Mr. Razeek’s family and community leaders believe that the failure to arrest Nowshaadh was due to his close association with Minister Rishard Bathiudeen. In his anticipatory bail application to the Magistrate Court, Nowshaadh claimed to have close links with Minister Bathiudeen.  Nowshaadh stated, in his affidavit to Court, that his arrest would cause irreparable harm to the Ministers’ reputation and work. At the High Court, Nowshaadh was represented by Mr. Saheed, General Secretary to the All Ceylon Muslim Congress (ACMC) of which Minister Bathiudeen is the President.

On 7^th June 2011, Mr. Razeek’s son, Riskhan, received a letter from the Presidential Secretariat informing him that the investigation into Mr. Razeek’s disappearance has been handed over to the Inspector General of Police. On 14^th June 2011 Mr. Riskhan and his relative, Mr. Umar Jaufer, were summoned to the Criminal Investigation Department (CID) in Colombo for inquiry. They were informed that the CID would conduct a fresh investigation into the case and that no person would be arrested or any action taken, until the investigation was complete. The family was not given a timeline for the inquiry, which they were told could take up to a year.

Finally on 8^th July 2011, Nowshaadh was arrested by the CCD in Killinochchi as a suspect in Mr. Razeek’s disappearance. Suspect Musdeen was arrested by the CCD shortly after. The remains of a body believed to be that of Mr. Razeek was exhumed in Kavathamunai, Oddamavadi on 28^th July 2011, based on information given by Musdeen.

NHRC Inquiry

On 15^th February 2010, Mr. Razeek’s family submitted a complaint to the National Human Rights Commission (NHRC) regarding Mr. Razeek’s disappearance. The complaint was recorded under case no HRC/619/10.  Mr. Razeek’s son made a statement to the NHRC in Colombo on 17^th March 2010. The family received no further communication from the NHRC until over a year later, on 4^th July 2011, when Riskhan was summoned to an inquiry at the NHRC.

On 18^th July 2011, responding to a specific request, the Chairman, Commissioners and senior staff of the NHRC met with the family, Mosque Committee, former CTF Trustees and concerned lawyers, civil society leaders in Colombo. The Commissioners assured that the NHRC would conduct its inquiry and ensure that the family would be kept informed of all developments in the police case, particularly when suspects are produced in courts. However, this has not always happened so far and the family has to depend on unofficial sources for information on the latest developments including the dates on which suspects are produced in courts.

Campaign by family, Mosque Committee and civil society groups

We believe that progress in Mr. Razeek’s case is mainly due to the sustained campaign carried out by the family, local community leaders and local, national and international civil society groups and activists calling for justice in this case.

Soon after Mr. Razeek’s disappearance, the family and local and national civil society groups were advised by Mr. Nihamath against carrying out any public campaigns and international appeals on the case. Several misleading e-mails were also sent to donors and other national and international organizations connected to CTF and Mr. Razeek. As a result, civil society groups at the national and international level did not campaign actively on Mr. Razeek’s case for over 8 months following his disappearance. It was only in the latter part of 2010, that a renewed campaign to search for Razeek was begun, when the family approached the Puttalam Grand Mosque and the Puttalam District organization of Muslim Theologians for help, and later several national and international human rights organizations.

The Mosque Committee organized discussions with the Divisional Secretary of Puttalam, lawyers, religious leaders, civil society groups, CTF trustees, local politicians, the Puttalam police and Mr. Nihamath. The Mosque Committee also held discussions with Nowshaadh’s family and the Northern Muslim community on the request of Minister Bathiudeen.

On 26^th October 2010, the Mosque Committee submitted appeals to the Attorney General, Inspector General of Police (IGP), Secretary to the Ministry of Defense and the Presidential Secretariat regarding the lack of any investigation into Mr. Razeek’s case. The letter from the Presidential Secretariat on 7^th June 2011 is believed to be in response to the complaint submitted in October last year.

25^th June 2011 marked 500 days since Mr. Razeeks’ disappearance. In the 17 months following the disappearance, protests and poster campaigns have been held by community leaders and civil society organizations in Mr. Razeek’s hometown and in the Puttalam District. The campaign for justice in this case has been sustained despite attempts to threaten, intimidate and silence Mr. Razeek’s family and individual and groups organizing or participating in such events. On 24^th June 2011 the Mosque Committee and family organized a signature campaign in Puttalam and distributed handbills appealing to Minister Bathiudeen and the police to surrender Nowshaadh and find Mr. Razeek.

Internationally, appeals relating to Mr. Razeek’s disappearance and killing and the lack of any credible investigation by the local police have been made by several international human rights groups, including at the sessions of the UN Human Rights Council in Geneva in March 2011.  Formal complaints have also been lodged with the UN Special Rapporteur on Human Rights Defenders and the UN Working Group on Enforced and Involuntary Disappearances and the UN Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights also called for justice in the case immediately after the exhumation of the body.

Obstructions and threats against the family, CTF Trustees and the Mosque Committee

Mr. Razeek’s family and those campaigning for justice in his case have been threatened and intimidated on several occasions. Mr. Razeek’s son, Riskhan and his son-in-law Azam received threatening calls in May 2010. On 15^th May 2010 the abductors threatened Azam’s mother that he would be killed if he did not agree to the abductors demands. A police complaint regarding the threats was filed with the Mundalama police on 16^th May 2010.  Also in May 2010, CTF Trustee Mr. Nafeel was threatened that he would be shot dead in Puttalam if he continued to campaign in Mr. Razeek’s case.

In October 2010, Mowlavi Abdullah, a member of the Mosque Committee, was threatened by Mr. Saheed, Nowshaadh’s lawyer in the anticipatory bail case and Secretary of the ACMC, that he would report Mowlavi Abdullah to the Defence Secretary Mr. Gotabhaya Rajapakse and that he will be shot dead in Puttalam if he continued to intervene in Mr. Razeek’s case.

Rifana, civil society member and former CTF employee received threats in February 2010 that she would suffer the same fate as Razeek if she did not provide information on CTF assets and her relationship with Razeek. In July 2010 the abductors threatened to harm Rifana’s son if she did not comply with their demands.

Members of the Mosque Committee received fresh threats in July 2011 during the campaign to mark 500 days since Mr. Razeek’s disappearance. From 24^th June 2011, Mr. Razeek’s family and the Mosque Committee conducted a signature campaign and distributed handbills in Puttalam and nearby towns and villages. Members of the Mosque Committee have received threats and been accused of misusing Mosque property for the campaign.

On 3^rd July 2011, at around 10.56 pm, Mr. Ajmail, secretary to the Mosque Committee, received a missed call on his mobile phone from no. +94729122269. At around 11 pm he received a message from the same number threatening to destroy him if he continued to campaign for Razeek’s case. Mr. Ajmail filed a complaint with the Puttalam police on 4^th July 2011. He received several more missed calls from the same number on 5^th July 2011. A few days prior to Mr. Ajmail had been summoned to the office of Minister Bathiudeen, after an event organized by the Northern Muslims was cancelled due to protests by the Mosque Committee.

Shortly after Mr. Razeek disappeared, leaflets were distributed in Puttalam, accusing Mr. Razeek of being a CIA agent and a womanizer who was having an affair with a female trustee of CTF. One leaflet, appealed to Minister Bathiutheen to intervene and punish CTF trustees for their involvement with Mr. Razeek.

More recently,  while Muslim leaders were trying to organize the closure of shops on the day of Razeek’s funeral, a group calling itself the ‘Puttalam Traders Association’ distributed a leaflet dated 1^st August 2011, stating that shops can remain open. However, in the end, all shop owners abided by the request of the Grand Mosque Committee and shops were closed in Sameeragama, Puttlam and nearby towns on the funeral day.

In the days leading up to the funeral, there were several rumours alleging that the Mosque Committee was plotting a campaign against the Northern Muslim community in Puttalam, resulting in a police inquiry against the Mosque Committee. There were rumours that the Puttalam Grand Mosque had issued a notice asking displaced Northern Muslims to vacate Puttalam, and based on which, some shops owned by this community, located along the Puttalam – Colombo highway in the village of Erukilampitty, were vacated.   “Navamani” a Tamil newspaper, on 31^st July (Sunday) carried the headline “Tension in Puttalam and Valachchenai”. The Grand Mosque assured all concerned that the rumours were baseless, and as it turned out, the funeral ceremony was conducted peacefully with no cause for unrest between the host community and the Northern Muslims. During the funeral, Moulawi Abdulla called on the Northern Muslims community to join hands to fight for justice for Razeek.

State Response

For over a year, State authorities including the police and NHRC failed to respond effectively to Mr. Razeek’s disappearance. The police were unwilling to arrest the chief suspect Nowshaadh despite clear evidence linking him to the disappearance. Statements and responses by Government ministers, their aids and the State media during this period appear to have been aimed at undermining or preventing an effective investigation into the case.

On 13^th October 2010, at a meeting at Puttalam Zahira Primary School, the Parliamentary Secretary to Minister Bathiudeen, Mr. S. R. M. Irshad, made a public statement, accusing Mr. Razeek of being an intermediary through whom funds were transferred from the CIA to the LTTE during the war. He also announced that Mr. Razeek was being held in the custody of the Ministry of Defense. This claim was not investigated to the best of our knowledge.

The media supportive to the state, have also published misinformation regarding the case including an article in the Lankadeepa, a Sinhala newspaper, on 2^nd July 2010, which quoted police sources as saying that Mr. Razeek had been kidnapped by an extremist Muslim group.

In November 2010, Minister Bathiudeen speaking at a public meeting organized by the Mosque Committee, promised to write to the IGP asking for action to be taken in Mr. Razeek’s case. The Minister also said that if the IGP failed to act within 2 weeks, he would take the matter up with the Defence Secretary. Minister Bathiudeen submitted a letter to the IGP on November 12, calling on the police to take necessary action in the Razeek case. However no action was taken based on this letter and the Minister took no further steps until 27^th June 2011 when he again offered to arrange a meeting with the Defence Secretary regarding the case.

On 25^th June 2011 an event organized by the Northern Muslim community, which Minister Bathiudeen was due to attend, was cancelled due to protests by the Mosque Committee. Following this incident, on 27^th June, Mr. Ajmail, Secretary to the Mosque Committee was summoned by Minister Bathiudeen who accused the Mosque Committee of tarnishing his reputation by linking him to the Razeek case. At this meeting the Minister challenged the Mosque Committee to take up the case with the Defence Ministry and offered to set up a meeting with the Defence Secretary if the Mosque Committee wanted it. Several days after this meeting Mr. Ajmail received threatening calls and messages on his phone. The Mosque Committee also received letters from Mr. Irshaad, Mr. Bathiudeens’ parliamentary secretary and from the organizer of the event that was cancelled on 25^th June 2011. Irshaad in his letter dated 1^st July 2011, accused the Mosque Committee of defaming Minister Bathiudeen and of misusing Mosque resources for Mr. Razeek’s campaign.

Despite the delays, there have been significant developments in the Razeek case since the June 2011 campaign marking 500 days since Razeek’s disaperance. The NHRC inquiry appears to have been re-commenced and two suspects, Nowshaadh and Musdeen were arrested by the CCD on 8^th and 13^th July respectively. Mr. Razeek’s body was exhumed on 28^th July based on information given by Musdeen and the post mortem was held on 2^nd August.

Takeover of CTF management by the Ministry of Defense:

In a parallel development, the Community Trust Fund was taken over by the Defence Ministry in June 2011. CTF has been under investigation by the NGO Secretariat since shortly after Mr. Razeek’s disappearance. The inquiry is based on a petition submitted by Minister Bathiudeen to the NGO Secretariat alleging financial mismanagement and malpractice against CTF and its trustees.

On 9^th June 2011, CTF received a fax copy of a letter by the Defence Ministry appointing the Chairman of an Interim Board of Management which will take over the management of CTF for a period of two years or until the completion of an inquiry by an Investigation Board appointed by the Defence Ministry. CTF received no other communication regarding the takeover and there is no clear indication of the basis or grounds for such action against the organization. Although CTF asked time till 20^th June to comply with the request to handover documents, records etc., the Interim Board went to CTF on 16^th June 2011. The day to day management of CTF, including the disbursement of funds for projects and staff, travel of staff out of the office etc. is strictly controlled by the Interim Board which includes a senior military officer and two government officials.

The NGO Secretariat initiated an inquiry into CTF in December 2010.  The Inquiry Board comprising of Mr. D.W. Abeywickrema, M. Meththapala and Mr. T.G. Ariyadasa conducted two hearings with CTF trustees and directors on 6^th and 14^th December 2010.  CTF trustees, Mr. Firdhaous and Ms. Jensila Majeed, CTF Executive Director, Mr. Fawas and CTF Program Director, Mr. Suhuri were present at the inquiry. Minutes of the Inquiry Board state that the inquiry was based on a petition submitted by Minister Rishad Bathiudeen and Mr. Hunais Farook M.P. to the NGO Secretariat on 12^th November 2010 alleging several points of mismanagement against CTF. Several of the issues raised at the inquiry related to Mr. Razeek’s disappearance and the actions of CTF directors and trustees in the aftermath.

On 27^th December 2010 CTF submitted an official letter to the NGO Secretariat, objecting to the manner in which the inquiry was conducted and asked that Minister Bathiudeen and former Trustee General Mr. M. Nihmath be present at the inquiry. CTF did not receive a response to this letter.

On 22^nd February 2011 a meeting was held at the Temple Trees with Mr. Douglas Nanayakkara, Director of the NGO Secretariat and CTF Trustees Mr. Riskhan, Mr. Firdhaous and Mr. Rafeek and the CTF Executive Director, Program Director and Finance Director. The meeting was organized by Mr. Nimal Weerasekara, private secretary to Mr. Namal Rajapakse M.P. (son of president Rajapakse). At the meeting it was agreed that CTF would continue to function as usual within the ambit of the program plan given to the NGO Secretariat. With regard to the CTF inquiry, Mr. Nanayakkara told the trustees and directors present that the matter had been taken up at the highest level and that CTF would be informed of the final decision. CTF has had no further contact with the NGO Secretariat until the letter from the Defence Ministry on 9^th June 2011.

It appears that the CTF inquiry and subsequent takeover are not independent of Mr. Razeek’s case particularly since the petition which led to the initial inquiry was sent by Minister Bathiudeen shortly after Mr. Razeek disappeared.

Ruki & Deanne, 17^th August 2011

• Who Killed Razeek? And Why? Unanswered Questions Two Years After His Abduction
• Disappearance
• Mano Ganesan on his experience of the anti-Tamil riots in July 1983
• DISAPPEARANCE OF HUMAN RIGHTS DEFENDERS & POLITICAL ACTIVISTS LALITH KUMAR WEERARAJ AND KUGAN MURUGAN ON 9TH DECEMBER 2011
• The protest by Wimal Weerawansa against the UN in Sri Lanka: Condoned by government?