1

CRITICAL HUMAN RIGHTS PRIORITIES FOR THE GOSL 16 FEBRUARY 2015

HUMAN RIGHTS ISSUE

DESCRIPTION REFERENCE

01

THE SCOPE OF NATIONAL RECONCILIATION

The need for reconciliation is not between the Sinhala and the Tamil people but between the present regime, the Tamil diaspora and the Tamil political leadership. “If the crimes during the war are somehow proved to the satisfaction of the UN, a need for national reconciliation will arise. The Tamil people will have to decide then whether despite the proved brutality (if proved) with which the regime is alleged to have prosecuted the war, whether they would consider being part of the same State or not. They of course cannot forget the similar or worse brutality of the LTTE. It is then that the need for national reconciliation will arise. Will there be a demand from the UN by the Tamil diaspora to carry out its responsibility to protect?” Need to address: - Regime and diaspora reconciliation required - Need for national reconciliation required - Responsibility to protect? - by the UN https://www.colombotelegraph.com/index.php/what-is-the-scope-of-national-reconciliation/

REF: Annex ‘A’

02 QUESTION IS NOT WAR AGAINST LTTE; BUT WAR ON CIVILIANS

No one can blame the Sri Lankan Government for conducting a war against the LTTE. Different considerations apply in relation to civilians. The Government estimated the civilian population in that area, the Wanni, where the war was raging at around 70,000. Eventually around 290,000 civilians came out from that area. The true figure of the people there is believed to be over 350,000 civilians. Government officials and civil society activists have testified to that effect. -The ICRC and the UN personnel were asked to leave that area. They were not able to fulfil their mandate in regard to humanitarian and protection issues. It was these voluntary organizations that were till then largely responsible for supplying the population in that area with drinking water, food, medicine and shelter, particularly in the context of the Government’s gross underestimation of the total population in that area. -The Sri Lankan Government, through persons in authority, has been publicly stating that any one who testifies before or assists the investigation in any way would be violating Sri

REF: Annex ‘B’

2

Lanka’s Constitution or its laws and would be prosecuted. -No witness and victims protection law exists in this country. A Bill brought to Parliament sometime around 2007/2008, was taken up for debate and thereafter, it was abandoned. -In the Joint Communiqué, issued by the President and the Secretary-General of the United Nations on the conclusion of the visit of the Secretary-General of the UN to Sri Lanka on 23rd May, 2009, the Sri Lankan Government committed itself to address the question of accountability. “Summary executions, massacres, disappearances, wanton destruction of property and forcible transfer of population can never be justified. No efforts should be spared to uncover responsibility, including recognition of command responsibility, for such actions.” http://srilankabrief.org/2014/08/discrimination-the-situation-of-sri-lanka-tamils-today/ http://srilankabrief.org/2014/11/question-war-ltte-war-civilians/

03 TRUTH AND JUSTICE Addressing truth and justice are critical if we as Sri Lankans are to have a chance at genuine and long-term reconciliation. Issues: -The lack of a political will to pursue independent investigations and prosecute perpetrators is a key factor contributing to the culture of impunity -The legacy of a flawed legal framework and the lack of capacity with the existing actors to deal with mass scale violations -The absence of a comprehensive victim and witness protection mechanism -The Civil society and media have critiqued that present Presidential Commission to Investigate into Complaints Regarding Missing Persons (Commission), for the delays in processing complaints, lack of victim and witness protection and for shifting its primary focus of missing persons to a others including international humanitarian law (IHL) violations -The violations of people’s rights, including evicting them from their own homes or preventing return to their own lands -The Government should articulate its positions in terms of rights protection, truth, justice,

REF: Annex ‘C’

3

accountability and reconciliation -Despite National Human Rights Action Plan and the National Action Plan for the LLRC, both with identified action points, actors and time frames for implementation, many questions remain regarding progress and impact of NPOA on LLRC. Such initiatives, while good on paper, have made little impact with the people -Truth-telling processes are important as they provide a space for victims, survivors and affected communities to be heard and to have public acknowledgement of what happened in the past. Truth commissions can also make recommendations for next steps, including reparations, trials and initiating state reforms that include the introduction of guarantees of non-recurrence of human rights violations and respect for the rights of all citizens -Reform should not only be limited to finding the truth, but must also address justice, accountability and prosecuting perpetrators of serious human rights violations. The Attorney General’s Department’s capacity to handle more cases of past violations is questionable. A special office to examine specific cases, with a fixed term limit in its operations, would do much to alleviate this burden. Such an office should have the mandate to investigate, indict and prosecute cases of serious human rights violations -Memorials built during the post-war context in Sri Lanka have only facilitated one narrative, that of the triumphalist victor, with no space for the multiple narratives of the victims and survivors. It is essential that space be provided across Sri Lanka for memorialization at the different levels that reflect the grievances of survivors, families, affected communities, civil society, artists and academia, to identify areas to consider in creating, identifying and maintaining memory spaces -Provide redress for past abuse; this can include compensation, rehabilitation and restitution. Reparations can be both financial and non-financial. For example, for land and property loss/damages, initiatives may provide for people to return to their land and compensate them for damages. Authorities can take steps to provide death certificates for those disappeared after conducting independent investigations -The Ministry of Land and Ministry of Defence should immediately assess the extent of land occupied by the military and other state entities and return lands to their legal owners. Land required for public purposes should be acquired in terms of the legal provisions

4

provided in the Land Acquisition Act http://groundviews.org/2015/01/19/ideas-for-a-road-map-for-truth-and-justice-in-sri-lanka/

04 ACCOUNTABILITY: CORRUPTION, HUMAN RIGHTS ABUSES AND WAR CRIMES

None of the GOSL efforts prevented the international investigation. It is a matter of time before the final report is released. The present government cannot pursue the same strategy as the previous government. The government should dispel misperceptions and educate the public as to why accountability is a precondition for good governance: to enhance the security forces’ reputation, restore the justice system’s credibility, and even more importantly debunk conspiracy theories about external intervention Justice involves:- -international and domestic demands for transitional justice -accountability for allegations of human rights abuses and war crimes -devolution of power Once its report is complete, the UNHCR will likely refer it to Sri Lanka’s ‘domestic mechanism for action’ to ensure good governance and transitional justice for the Tamil community and the country as a whole The government needs to answer a number of questions:- -How does the delay in releasing the UNHCR report help the government set up a domestic mechanism for managing human rights and reconciliation issues? -Why are releasing the report and strengthening of the domestic mechanisms posited as contradictory? -Would the domestic mechanism as an alternative inquiry into war crimes allegations replace the international inquiry or serve as a mechanism to apply the report’s findings to ensure restorative justice? -Such an inquiry will have a positive impact on the new government’s efforts to restore the credibility of the domestic justice system, and would help eradicate public doubts about the

REF: Annex ‘D’

5

Sri Lankan government’s commitment to truth and justice -If the government is opposed to international intervention, it should explain its reasons to the Tamil community, given their reservations about a domestic inquiry as indicated in the resolution passed at the Northern Provincial Council -How will truth contribute to transitional justice and good governance? -How might that truth be used as a smokescreen to exert undue pressure on Sri Lanka? -How will the revelation of truth and subsequent restitution relieve such pressures and place the country on a high moral footing in the world’s eyes? -How would Sri Lanka’s commitment to truth and justice contribute to international human rights? -What precedent could Sri Lanka set for international human rights? The government needs to pay as much attention and due consideration to:- -The Tamils’ perspectives regarding the type of inquiry that would be most impartial, as much as to those who oppose such an inquiry -Defuse simplistic arguments accusing Tamil political parties and civil society groups calling for an international inquiry of acts of aggression against the Sinhalese -Not succumb to the claims that the Tamil parties demand for an impartial inquiry is indicative of their refusal to work within a united Sri Lanka or their lack empathy for the difficult transition process with which the government is faced The onus is on the government to exploit this opportunity and bring to closure the issue so that the country can move onto other equally pressing issues http://groundviews.org/2015/02/16/truth-and-accountability-corruption-human-rights-abuses-and-war-crimes/

6

05 CASE OF THE TAMIL GENOCIDE

Sri Lanka’s bloody armed conflict ended over five years ago, killing tens of thousands of Tamil civilian men, women, and children. Despite the war’s end, however, there has been no accountability or justice for the deaths of innocent Tamils. The obligation to prevent and punish genocide under the Genocide Convention is not a matter of political choice or calculation, but one of binding customary international law. An overview of the evidence demonstrating the Sri Lankan government’s genocidal intent against Tamils: -According to a U.N. Internal Review Report, up to 70,000 Tamil civilians were killed in the final months of the war -The official statements made by high-ranking Sri Lankan officials provide a strong basis for inferring genocidal intent. They depict the anti-Tamil hostility underpinning Sinhala Buddhist chauvinism, which has long been a hallmark feature of Sri Lanka’s ethno-nationalist politics. The government’s construct of Sri Lanka is based on the primacy of the Sinhala identity, which fundamentally excludes Tamils -Extensive evidence is available that satisfies four of the five enumerated genocidal acts in the Genocide Convention: (1) killing members of the group; (2) causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group; (3) deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part; and (4) imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group -At the end of January 2009, government forces were killing approximately thirty-three Tamil people each day, with these casualties increasing to 116 people per day by April 2009. This toll surged, “with an average of 1,000 civilians killed each day until May 19, 2009.” The U.N. Panel of Experts reported on an elite unit within the Special Task Force (STF) of the police was implicated in organizing “white van” operations in which individuals were abducted, tortured, and often “disappeared.” -Systematic attacks on hospitals during the 2009 military campaign caused serious bodily and mental harm to Tamils. U.N. Report of the Secretary-General’s Panel of Experts on Accountability in Sri Lanka found credible allegations that security forces committed rape and sexual violence against Tamil civilians while screening those leaving areas of conflict and in IDP camps. Widespread and systematic violations by the Sri Lankan security forces occur in a manner that indicates a coordinated, systematic plan approved by the highest levels of government. Abduction, arbitrary detention, torture, rape and sexual violence have increased in the post-war period. The destructive campaign has caused permanent

REF: Annex ‘E’

7

mental effects on those who survived -U.N. Panel of Experts Report found that the government deliberately understated the Tamil population size “as part of a strategy to limit the supplies going into the Vanni.” The low numbers also indicate that the Government conflated civilians with LTTE in the final stages of the war -The military blockade against Tamil areas has contributed to the historical impoverishment and isolation of the Tamil community. The blockade has prevented ordinary items and all humanitarian aid intended for civilians. The U.N. Panel of Experts Report found that the government deliberately understated the Tamil population size “as part of a strategy to limit the supplies going into the Vanni.” -Doctors aligned with the Sri Lankan government performed unconsented abortions on Tamil women. Government health workers forced mothers to accept surgically implanted birth control in the Tamil villages of Veravil, Keranchi, and Valaipaddu in Kilinochchi in the Northern Province. When the women objected, the nurses said that if they did not agree to the contraceptive, they could be denied treatment at the hospital in the future. More than eighty percent of Tamil women in central Sri Lanka were offered a lump sum payment in return for their ability to reproduce. After receiving this payment—typically 500 rupees—women underwent surgical sterilization http://hrbrief.org/2015/01/the-legal-case-of-the-tamil-genocide/

06 STRATEGIC PLAN TO REACH OUT TO WIN ‘HEARTS & MINDS’ OF TAMIL DIASPORA AND THE TAMIL YOUTH

Post- war reconciliation must begin at the grassroots level. But it seems we keep making

the same mistakes we made Pre-war era when it comes to community building, promoting

and accepting the diversity of our country. Instead of reaching out to the Tamil diaspora

and the Tamil community in the country we have further isolated and continue to treat

them as second hand citizens.

Education is an important tool in this area. ”"In 1971, a system of standardisation of marks

was introduced for admissions to the universities, obviously directed against Tamil-

medium students (referred to earlier). K.M. de Silva describes it as follows: 'The qualifying

mark for admission to the medical faculties was 250 (out of 400) for Tamil students,

whereas it was only 229 for the Sinhalese. Worse still, this same pattern of a lower

REF: Annex ‘F’

8

qualifying mark applied even when Sinhalese and Tamil students sat for the examination in

English. In short, students sitting for examinations in the same language, but belonging to

two ethnic groups, had different qualifying marks.'” Instead of leaving the Tamil Youth

behind, they must be given equal opportunity. Without higher education their potential to

contribute to the society will drastically decrease and in return increasing the frustration

and disappointment in them towards the SL government and Sinhalese society. Stories

about Tamil youth and university students being harassed by the SL army and police still

continue to surface.

http://www.internationalpolicydigest.org/wp-

content/uploads/2014/08/1407532883544.pdf

07 POSITIVELY ENGAGE TAMIL LEADERS/ YOUTH LEADERS/ SENIOR CITIZENS AND DIASPORIC LEADERS TO DRAW UP A COMMON AGENDA FOR RECONCILIATION

In March 2014 the SL government banned the functions of 16 Tamil diaspora organisations

from operating in the country. While some of these banned organizations had direct links

to LTTE, SL Government could have benefited from working together with some other

organizations. During the time many young, educated Tamil diaspora youth voiced their

disbelief mixed with anger and disappointment. Rather than making the decisions for the

Tamil society, it’s important to hear their own voices. It’s important to have them involved

in the decision making process of reconciliation and community building. The

representation of Tamil Leaders/Politicians must be encouraged and supported by the

government to give a voice to the community.

Over 50,000 Tamil youth from upcountry estates in Sri Lanka were unable to exercise their

right to vote at the elections for the Uva Provincial Council, a human rights organization

has alleged. Given the volatile situation the country is facing in the human rights front,

these situations should be handled with much importance; especially given the upcoming

presidential election. It’s important that the voting rights of Tamil youth are protected.

REF: Annex ‘G’

08 AMNESTY TO ALL LTTE

AND MILITARY EXCESSES

DURING THE WAR

There are allegations that war crimes were committed by both the Sri Lankan military and

the rebel Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (Tamil Tigers) during the Sri Lankan War,

particularly during the final months of the conflict in 2009. After the defeat in 2009, many

LTTE cadres have been sentenced by Sri Lankan courts of justice under local legislation.

Many more are under investigation to the date. But no military personnel have been under

-------------------

9

such investigation as an individual. These former cadres are no more terrorists, but citizens

of Sri Lanka contributing to the development.

Therefore it would be more productive if all LTTE & military excesses during the war can

be pardoned.

09 POST-WAR MILITARY EXCESSES

ARMY SCUFFLE IN KILLINOCHI INJURES TWO CHILDREN: - An adult and two children were admitted to hospital after being injured in a scuffle with army soldiers in Killinochi. When locals gathered at the scene to find out what had happened, and seek justice, further army soldiers were called to the area, resulting in a further 2 children being injured during consequential scuffles. The children, aged 6 and 2, were admitted to hospital, after one was stomped on by a soldier. http://www.tamilguardian.com/article.asp?articleid=13357 MILITARY ANIMALS ATTACK CHILDREN: -When these children were playing on the streets, nearby there is military camp, from this military camp certain military soldiers came and kicked a small girl and also these military animals slapped the other girl mercilessly. The moment, his uncle by name Chandrakumar saw these merciless acts of the military animals immediately went to the military camp and asked for justice for this incident. But, immediately, the military soldiers started attacking him severely. Due to their attacks, his head got severely injured and bleeding profusely. After seeing this act of injustice, the people gathered together against the military soldiers. http://www.vivalanka.com/newspage/823777ai-military-animals-attacked-children JAFFNA UNI STUDENT ASSAULTED BY MILITARY INTELLIGENCE OFFICERS: A student at the University of Jaffna was assaulted on Sunday evening, by four men who stated they were from Sri Lanka's military intelligence wing. The student, who is currently a second year undergraduate, was detained by the officers at 10pm local time and taken in front of university premises where the assault took place http://www.tamilguardian.com/article.asp?articleid=13168 MILITARY GENERAL HANDS OVER 1,500 ACRES OF TAMIL LAND TO SINHALA SETTLEMENT PROJECT: Over 1,500 acres of land belonging to Tamil families in Mullaithivu have been transferred

REF: Annex ‘H’

10

to Sinhalese families resettled in Kokkuthoduvay under a ‘Mahaweli Development Scheme’, despite over 3,000 unresolved cases filed by Tamils regarding land ownership issues in the area http://www.tamilguardian.com/article.asp?articleid=13169 NAVY SOLDIER AMONG 8 ARRESTED FOR GANG RAPE OF UNDERAGE GIRLS: Eight suspects, including a navy soldier involved in the alleged gang rape of two 14-year-old girls in Kalutara, have been arrested. An army soldier is also alleged to have been involved in the gang rape who is absconding SL MILITARY FABRICATES EVIDENCES TO DISTORT MANNAR ASSASSINATION, SAY RESIDENTS: The Sri Lankan military intelligence and the SL police have been trying to fabricate a story that the ex-LTTE member and former Tamil Eelam policeman Nakuleswaran was slain due to personal grudges, the residents said JAFFNA UNI STUDENT ASSAULTED BY MILITARY INTELLIGENCE OFFICERS: A student at the University of Jaffna was assaulted on Sunday evening, by four men who stated they were from Sri Lanka's military intelligence wing. The student, who is currently a second year undergraduate, was detained by the officers at 10pm local time and taken in front of university premises where the assault took place 90 YEARS OLD MOSQUE IN TRINCOMALEE DEMOLISED BY MILITARY: The 90 year old mosque, situated at Karumalai-oottu in Trincomalee Town and Gravets division established in 1926 and registered as a Jumma Mosque in 1947, has been seized by the occupying SL military, which demarcated the area as ‘High Security Zone’ in 2009 - has been demolished within the past 2 days MILITARY SHOWS ITS FORCE IN THE NORTH; ANOTHER WORKSHOP CANCELLED: TNA parliamentarian Suresh Premachandran states that the army continues to threaten journalists in the Northern Province. He also accuses the army of taking various measures to suppress local journalists. Due to this issue, the training workshop for journalists that was about to be held in Kankasanthurai has been cancelled

11

UNFINISHED WAR IN SRI LANKA THREATENS PARADISE REGAINED: Sri Lanka is in its sixth year of peace. What dampens much of Tamil confidence in a genuine reconciliation is the looming security presence in the north with countless high-walled military camps, packed security trucks and patrols, and soldiers running small shops and hotels. The army presence has also led to allegations of land grabs, a charge the military denies. In the coastal region of Palali, an area stretching along the Jaffna Peninsula, where the military has set up a high security zone, more than 2,800 fishermen’s families are fighting a legal battle to get their land back. In the fishing village of Oori, two mothers await news of their young daughters who were taken to a care home three months ago after their alleged rape by members of the Sri Lankan navy. In a lawyer’s office in the town of Mannar, a middle-aged woman sobs uncontrollably as she recounts her five-year struggle to find her son, one of thousands of cases of young men and women who disappeared after being picked up by soldiers. NATIONAL SHAME: RAPISTS IN SRI LANKAN ARMED FORCES: The rape of a young child by members of the armed forces is a serious crime. The fact that the area where this happened is now under the control of the armed forces is another aspect which adds to the weight of the crime. Naturally, people in these areas live in great fear of the armed forces. Now that a report of a serious crime has been lodged against seven officers, the families of victims and the entire neighborhoods would be living in serious fear. The girl’s failure to identify the perpetrators of the crime is quite likely to be due to such fear. She may even have been instructed by adults not to identify the perpetrators because her life and the life of her family would be in serious jeopardy if she does so GANG RAPE SUSPECTS [NAVY SAILORS] IDENTIFIED BY THE POLICE GET POLITICAL TREATMENT AND BAILED OUT: A coordinating secretary of the President has reportedly ordered the police not to take action against the Navy personnel who had allegedly raped an 11-year old girl for 11 days as well as another 9-year old girl. The reports further indicate that the particular officer has called the Kytes Police on two occasions after the incidents and said that if they were put under remand custody that will cause the losing of moral among the forces ENLISTED TAMIL WOMEN RAPED BY SRI LANKAN MILITARY: Tamil women who were recently enlisted into the Sri Lankan military were taken from Mullaitheevu to a Sri Lankan military party in Mihintale and raped on Saturday, reports

12

Tamilnet. After being returned to their original areas, the Tamil women’s complaints to the Sri Lankan police were ignored, whilst being belittled by the Sri Lankan military Civil Security Department (CSD). The CSD said that such practices by the Sri Lankan military were ‘routine’ a sexually harassed Tamil women told Tamilnet. A total of 47 conscripted Tamil women were sexually harassed and raped by Sri Lankan military personnel. http://www.tamilguardian.com/article.asp?articleid=12947 ARMY SERIOUSLY ATTEMPTING TO DISABLE THE “ITHU NAMTHESAM” NEWSPAPER PUBLISHED IN JAFFNA: The allegations have been made that the Sri Lanka Goverment through military is trying to disable the “Ithu Namthesam” newspaper being published from Jaffna. The military and the intelligence unit have been directly involved in attacking and threatening the distributors and sellers of Ithu Namthesam” newspaper, the newspaper administration said THE MILITARY INTELLIGENCE OFFICERS THREATENED PEOPLE OF VALIGAMAM IN JAFFNA AGAINST CONDUCTING PUJA: The Valigamam people who have been living as refugees in camps decided to perform a puja to appeal them to be resettled in their own lands in Jaffna today. In this regard, the military has threatened them against performing any puja there on the eve of Ganesh Chaturthi

10 AFTER THE WAR MILITARY WAS NOT DE-MOBILIZED; BUT INTENSELY MOBILIZED AND DEPLOYED ALLOVER

There is strong criticism against the admission of the security forces to handle social management problems. It is a sign of fascistic style of politics to handover civil administration to military officers, who listen to commands from the top instead of referring legislation relevant to the social problem. On the other hand the military regiments are introduced as saviors of the people for any emergency. At the same time military leaders including the Defence secretary enter the minds of the people as socio political leaders, to be called in the event of an emergency. Instead of removing the security forces from the civil society after the end of the war, they have become indispensable apparatus to be used in construction, production and civil administration. They are not de-mobilized; no, they are intensely mobilized and deployed allover the island. The real protest against the militaristic fascist styled government has come from the mass protest in

REF: Annex ‘J’

13

the south. It is growing fast VISIBLE DE-MILITARIZATION OF NORTH & EAST: The military victory over the LTTE is conclusive and there is little chance that it would regroup and return any time soon, the military victory needs to be converted into a stable and sustainable peace. In mostly Tamil North & East, military presence is disturbing & unsettling as they are viewed as oppressors. Military personnel frequently patrol these areas – day and night. Sadly, the military’s intrusion into practically all aspects of civilian affairs remains a way of life in the conflict-affected North and East. Hence it is time for military to down-scale their presence in North & East. De-militarization

should be felt by the locals. Military should relocate to a few strategic places from where

they would be able to respond in a necessity. This is a crucial step in winning the trust of

local Tamil community which in turn will change the stand of diaspora & satisfy the

UNHRC.

11

ICRC NOTES 16,000 LANKANS MISSING

“When people disappear, there are two kinds of victims: the individuals who have gone missing and their families, torn between despair and hope, living with uncertainty and pain, waiting for news, sometimes for decades,” - In the run-up to the International Day of the Disappeared, 30 August, ICRC says in Sri Lanka, the fate and whereabouts of more than 16,000 people remain unknown ACTIVISTS PETITION MPS ON THE MISSING: “The number of disappeared people in Sri Lanka since the 1980s is second only to Iraq globally. The government’s efforts to address this issue – including to investigate cases of enforced disappearances, to provide redress to their families, to hold those responsible to account and to memorialize those missing appropriately – have been wholly inadequate. It is time for the government’s orchestrated lies and broken promises to be replaced with a genuine commitment to the truth,” said Richard Bennett, Amnesty International’s Asia Pacific Director

REF: Annex ‘K’

12 DEATHS IN POLICE CUSTODY

-While these murders are in violation of the constitution what is of grave concern is the impunity with which these murders are committed. In no country that respects rule of law and democratic governance can these acts be condoned under any circumstances and the responsibility lies with the state to account for these violations of fundamental rights.Failure to act decisively against such persons responsible for the commission of

REF: Annex ‘L’

14

these crimes, adversely affect the image of our country and the people lose faith in the judicial system of our country -A 17-year-old boy arrested with his brother and brutally assaulted by a group of policemen from the Kandaketiya police without any reason. He died at the remand prison due to the severe injuries he suffered by the assault. He died in his brother's arms. Now the brother who is still in remand prison is suffering from mental stress and is in need of immediate treatment - DailyFT: 24 May 2014

13 ENFORCED DISAPPEARANCES AND EXTRAJUDICIAL KILLINGS

Technically speaking, enforced disappearances and extrajudicial killings are two distinct categories of gross violations of human rights, these two categories often overlap in Sri Lanka. Often, what get classified as enforced disappearances are kidnappings followed by interrogation, which often involve the use of torture and ill-treatment, followed by executions done in secret and, finally, the secret disposal of bodies. Successive governments have refused to make Sri Lanka a signatory to the International Convention for the Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearances. The government’s approval for resorting to enforced disappearances under certain circumstances is implied in the government’s refusal to become a party to this convention.

REF: Annex ‘M’

14

CASES ON MASS GRAVES

CASE ON MASS GRAVE AT MATALE TAKEN ALONG A DIFFERENT DIRECTION: The authorities are making an attempt to divert the period of the mass grave at Matale in a different direction despite it was pronounced in courts that it belonged to 1986 – 1990 period. JVP Somawansa Amarasinghe who had gone to observe the proceedings answering questions by journalists said the skeletal remains relevant to the case definitely belonged to the 1986 – 1990 period and not of those who had died before 1950 as police attempt to establish. There are doubts whether the skeletal remains sent to the US for the test were those that were removed from Matale mass grave THE CASE OF MAANTHAI MASS GRAVE IN MANNAR – FINAL REPORT TO BE SUBMITTED ON 27TH IN THE COURT: On last December 20th while digging for the setting up of water pipes in the Mannar – Thiruketheeswaram street in Maanthai area human skeletons have been excavated. Later the excavation process was started in presence of the Mannar Magistrate Ananthi Kanaganthram. During this process about 81 human skeletons were recovered

REF: Annex ‘N’

15 MEDIA FREEDOM Media means bringing out real facts, but in countries like Sri Lanka the freedom of press is a big question mark. The facts such as many journalists are being murdered, gone missing

REF: Annex ‘P’

15

and media offices are being attacked are the continuous long-standing unfortunate positions of media today. With the fear that the truth will be revealed, the government forces are involved in these kinds of attacks THE ROAD TO JUSTICE - BREAKING THE CYCLE OF IMPUNITY IN THE KILLING OF JOURNALISTS: Sri Lanka placed 4th – after Iraq, Somalia and Colombia - among top ten countries with greatest threat to press freedom – targeted violence against journalists

16 HARASSMENT OF CIVIL SOCIETY

Transparency International, the global anti-corruption movement, in a statement yesterday condemned the continued harassment of its chapter in Sri Lanka, including a growing number of death threats to the staff. “The role of civil society is to hold those in power to account and to do this it must be allowed to function free from intimidation. The anti-corruption work that TISL undertakes strengthens the trust that citizens have in their leaders by calling for more transparent government and educating citizens how to fight corruption,”

REF: Annex ‘Q’

17

HOW CREDIBLE ARE STORIES OF RAPE IN NORTH?

There are time-tested ways to embarrass a country. Rape, torture, kidnapping, genocide are just a handful and with mainstream media, roped in journalists, puppet UN officials, money-hungry NGOs forming a team to project ‘allegations’ & ‘stories’ without evidence or proof, a country is automatically declared guilty by default

REF: Annex ‘R’

18 WAR AFFECTED WOMEN

More than five years after the end of the war, women across Sri Lanka face numerous challenges in rebuilding their lives. Throughout the war, women all over Sri Lanka called for answers to the whereabouts of their missing loved ones and justice for the wrongs that occurred. This continues in the post war context. -The most recent Presidential Commission appointed by President Rajapaksa commenced in 2013 as an investigation into the overwhelming numbers of enforced or involuntary disappearances, but was converted into one looking at a broad range of violations of human rights and international humanitarian law, a move that raised questions as to whether the present government is genuinely interested in revealing the fate of the tens of thousands missing. -Although around 20,000 complaints were received, the Commission so far has moved at a snail’s pace. Serious issues have been raised regards its independence. Observations of its public proceedings also beg the question whether the commission is in actual fact interested and able to meet its mandate and whether this commission like the successive

REF: Annex ‘S’

16

commissions before it is yet another tactic by the State to delay and subvert the call for truth and justice. Demands:

• Those being held under the Prevention of Terrorism Act (PTA) without charge should be released immediately or charged based on sound and credible evidence. Trials, including on-going trials, of those charged under the PTA should be expedited.

• Immediately publish a list of those who are detained, the reasons for their detention and the places where they are detained. This list should be shared with their family and legal counsel.

• Ensure unhindered access of family and legal counsel to all who are detained. • Ensure persons are held only at gazetted detention centres and close all unofficial

detention centres. • Ensure constitutional safeguards and due process rights are protected in the

conduct of arrests and detentions. • Take immediate steps to end torture, sexual violence and other inhumane treatment

of those in custody and the investigation and prosecution of those responsible. • An immediate investigation, arrest and prosecution of State and non State actors

who are alleged to have committed enforced or involuntary disappearances, and other grave human rights violations.

• Introduce an effective witness and victim protection mechanism and action against anyone who threatens, coerces and harasses individuals who continue to search for their missing loved ones.

• Repeal the PTA and other laws that provide for broad powers to arrest and detain with limited recourse to due process.

• Introduce reform in the investigative processes including amending the Commissions of Inquiry Act and ensure future restorative and retributive processes are transparent, just and efficient.

• Immediate steps to demilitarise the country, particularly the North and East and return all lands occupied by the security forces, police and others to their rightful owners and to provide compensation.

• Conduct independent investigations and allocate resources for identified mass graves and provide for technical and forensic expertise required for next steps.

• Provide for an inclusive process at memorialisation which is not limited to triumphalist war monuments but involves and captures the views of families who

17

have lost loved ones from across Sri Lanka. • Address the issue of intimidation and surveillance of war affected communities

including former combatants and families of the disappeared. • Respect freedom of association and expression and facilitate a space for civil society,

women’s groups and community groups to be able to function freely without undue control and pressure from the State. This should include space for families and affected communities to mourn their dead.

• Facilitate pending visits by special procedures including the UNWGEID Signatures; http://www.vivalanka.com/newspage/824245ai-an-appeal-president-sri-lanka-war-affected-women

19 THE WOES OF IDPS IN THE VALIKAMAM

Total IDPS In Jaffna District – 19730. Total number of Open welfare centers – 34. The life of the Internally Displaced People (IDPs) in Valikamam region of the Jaffna district is becoming miserable. There are no proper houses. Roofs are mostly of tin sheets, almost corroded; the roofs leak during rains and the floor becomes a pool of water. There are about a dozen of common toilets and at times they have to wait in queues to ease them. The land around their houses has become marshy; the stagnant water has become breeding grounds for mosquitoes. There are one or two wells; but no running water. UN RAPPORTEUR CALLS FOR DURABLE SOLUTIONS FOR SRI LANKAN IDPS: “I also urge the Government to take all necessary steps to address the situation of IDPs living in protracted displacement, as well as those who have returned or settled elsewhere in the north but still live in very precarious conditions and need more durable housing, access to social services, and livelihood opportunities,” Beyani

REF: Annex ‘T’

20

FAMILIES SEEK ANSWERS OVER MISSING

One lady told the Commission her husband surrendered to the army during the final stages of the war but he has not been seen or heard of since then. She had told the Commission if the Government was acting with responsibility as it claimed after the war, then it must take the responsibility to hand her husband, who surrendered to the army, back to her safe and sound

REF: Annex ‘U’

21 CONTINUING DISCRIMINATION AGAINST LANKA’S TEA

Speaking on ‘Local Government Services and the Plantation Sector Community’, Rev Fr. Andrew Devadason, Resident Priest, St. Marks Church – Badulla, explained how the plantation community is discriminated and excluded from the country’s mainstream

REF: Annex ‘V’

18

PLANTATION COMMUNITY

development process entirely, and said, “One point that must be noted and stressed is the historical nature of isolation of the plantation community from the local Government service delivery.”

22

OVER 73,000 PEOPLE IN SRI LANKA ARE SUBJECTED TO MODERN DAY SLAVERY, GLOBAL STUDY FINDS

An estimated 73,600 people - 0.359 percent of the entire population of 20.48 million- in Sri Lanka are subjected to modern day slavery, - 2014 Global Slavery Index, released by Walk Free Foundation. Modern day slavery, which is defined as possession or control of a person that deprives them of their rights with the intention of exploiting them http://www.colombopage.com/archive_14B/Nov24_1416810944CH.php

REF: Annex ‘W’

23

SOME STATE DEPARTMENTS IN TRINCOMALEE BANNED MUSLIM PRAYERS

In some government departments in the Trincomalee district, the Muslim employees are banned from performing religious prayers and ceremonies by their higher authorities

REF: Annex ‘X’

24

SRI LANKA UNDERMINING INTERNATIONAL LAW

Roughly 1800 refugees were seeking shelter in Sri Lanka, with as many as 1500 of them from Pakistan, belonging to minority groups such as Christians, Shia Muslims and members of the Ahmadiyya community, all of them, suppressed, marginalized and attacked, and the last of which have been slaughtered without any pretence ever since they were declared non-Muslims. There is no denying that the increase in refugees in Sri Lanka has been exponential, and the government’s claim of a 700 percent increase might not be too far off the mark. It is also true that Sri Lanka is not a signatory of the 1951 UN Refugee Convention. However, Sri Lanka cannot legally send refugees back to torture or worse. And still, over 108 people have been deported back to Pakistan between August 1st and 14th

2014 UN EXPERTS TELL LANKA STOP ALL RETURNS: At least 108 Pakistani citizens have been deported since the beginning of August, according to the UN Refugees Agency (UNHCR). “Most asylum seekers from Pakistan belong to religious minorities, including Ahmadiyya Muslim, Christian and Shia, groups that are often subjected to persecution, discrimination and violence in Pakistan,” “Many of them are being deported despite being registered with UNHCR and having their first instance interviews still pending.” “It is our hope that the Government of Sri Lanka will collaborate with the UN Refugees Agency in its work to guarantee the rights of asylum seekers, and avoid any actions that could lead to possible tragic consequences.”

REF: Annex ‘Y’

19

25

THOUSANDS OF WAR-DISABLED LIVE BELOW POVERTY LINE

"These people even lack the means to be self-employed," he added. "Some of these persons live below the poverty line and receive insufficient relief from the authorities. Some of these disabled persons are breadwinners but have no proper means of employment to gain sustenance for themselves. They live in temporary huts with their families," Sritharan claimed. It has been revealed that there are thousands of disabled persons in the secretariat divisions of Karaichi, Kandawalai, Pachilampalli, Poneryn and Kilinochchi. Diaspora communities had given some assistance to these people but that was not enough to even partially sustain 10 families.

REF: Annex ‘Z’

26

ISSUES OF ACCOUNTABILITY

The current path and actions of the Government in addressing the international challenges it faces on the accountability for the last stages of the war and its commitments/obligations in terms of international human rights and humanitarian laws, appears to be inimical to the aforesaid core interests and values of placing the interests of the nation and its people first. These actions appear to be based on an aggressive, arrogant and self righteous stance that ignores the committed to obligations and desired foreign policy framework for effective international relations in the globalised world we live in today

REF: Annex ‘AA’

27 REPEAL OF 18TH AMENDMENT TO CONSTITUTION

The United Nations Human Rights Committee, while welcoming several measures taken by the Government of Sri Lanka to ensure human rights of its citizens, asked the government to repeal the 18th Amendment to the Constitution approved by the parliament in September 2010, which discontinues the Constitutional Council and empowers the President to dismiss or appoint members of the judiciary and other independent bodies. The Committee asked the Government to take legislative and other measures to ensure transparent and impartial processes for appointments to the judiciary and other independent bodies

REF: Annex ‘AB’

28 DELEGATING LAND AND POLICE POWERS WITHOUT FACILITATING SEPARATISM

Considering the activities of the Tamil Nadu Government and the separatist diaspora, delegating full police powers, especially to the Northern Provincial Council, could end up with rejuvenating separatism.. Thereafter, with the concurrence of all Provincial Councils, certain civilian duties of the police that cannot be used for separatist activities should be delegated to the provinces. A similar hybrid solution should be considered for land powers as well

REF: Annex ‘AC’

29 13TH CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT IS DEEPLY FLAWED

Sri Lanka has no think tanks, except for the Institute of Policy Studies, the exception that proves the rule. Unfortunately its expertise is in the field of economics. Though it has done yeoman service with regard to promoting more enlightened trade policies, the absence of a

REF: Annex ‘AD’

20

political equivalent has meant that the socio-political arguments for reform have no traction. Therefore India should provide support for thinking about Sri Lankan issues. A spur to executive action is needed, but given the top heavy nature of decision making in Sri Lanka, and the excessive responsibilities, which preclude innovation, of the few key officials who make decisions, this will have to come from outside. As in the field of Human Rights, Ministry of Policy Planning & Implementation was abolished, its tasks being entrusted to the Ministry of External Affairs which had neither capacity nor inclination to promote such Rights, we were reduced to lurching from crisis to crisis A massive airport that has no scheduled flights, excellent connectivity in the North with no corresponding development of Human Resources to take advantage of the infrastructure that had been developed, an excellent Rehabilitation programme for former Combatants with no policy or coherent programmes for Reintegration We need to go further in terms of devolution, since it is clear that government needs to improve mechanisms for consultation of the people and providing better responses to their needs. However devolution should not impinge on national security, and this is an even more important consideration now than in the eighties, given the trend in recent years to split up countries

30 WHAT ARE THE RIGHTS CONSTITUTIONALLY & LEGALLY DENIED TO TAMILS IN SRI LANKA?

Sri Lanka has failed to project what Tamils and minorities actually enjoy in Sri Lanka. Sri Lanka has also failed to statistically show that in many ways the minorities are economically and socially placed above the majority Sinhalese Buddhists of Sri Lanka. -First look at the Constitution which clearly sets out fundamental rights. There is no word in the constitution that denies Tamils or minorities equal rights. -The foremost place afforded to Buddhism cannot be challenged because Buddhism was the state religion chosen by royalty and passed down from King to the next. The world needs to look from the lens of what people currently enjoy and not what Tamil politicians are demanding for themselves.

REF: Annex ‘AE’

21

Basic of questions:- -Are Tamil pregnant mothers denied entry to State hospitals to deliver their baby because they are Tamil? NO -Are Tamil patients denied State doctors and nurse care because they are Tamil? NO -Are Tamils denied admission to State schools because they are Tamil? NO -Are Tamils given less marks because they are Tamil? NO -Are Tamils denied State scholarships because they are Tamil? NO -Are Tamils denied employment in State sector because they are Tamil? NO -Are Tamils not allowed to travel in public buses because they are Tamil? NO -Are Tamils given separate seats in public places because they are Tamil? NO -Are Tamils made to stand in separate queues because they are Tamil? NO -Are Tamils denied right of freedom to travel throughout the country? NO -Are Tamils denied right of residence because they are Tamil? NO -Are Tamils denied right to worship because they are Tamil? NO -Are Tamils denied burial/crematorium rights because they are Tamil? NO -Will public or private entities refuse or deny to serve a Tamil because they are Tamil? NO -Will parcels, letters and postcards not be accepted or delivered because people are Tamil? NO -Are there separate areas for Tamils? NO -Have Tamils being terminated from service because they were Tamil? NO

22

There is also the need to look at the reciprocity:- -While Tamils can live, buy property, indulge in business, educate their children throughout Sri Lanka even in the South of Sri Lanka where most Tamils now live and have lived, do Tamils and in particular Tamil politicians want Sinhalese to live in the North? NO -While Tamils buy property, build houses/flats etc are people aware that the majority of them sell or rent/lease only to Tamils? NO -While Tamils own businesses and the wholesale market is virtually run by the minorities in Sri Lanka as are most coated companies why are Sinhalese not allowed to run businesses in the North and everyone together shouts ‘colonization’ -How many job adverts purposely omit Sinhalese by declaring that Tamil is a must (these are all NGO/INGO jobs/projects) discriminating Sinhalese from applying and getting the job. -When 7 out of 10 people belong to one race/ethnicity and religion what other country has given just 1% equal language status as Sri Lanka has done? Rightly, there should be only one national language and English as the link language. If Sinhalese is the official national language it means that every citizen must know Sinhalese. Do not Tamils have to learn German to live in Germany, French to live in France and Japanese to live in Japan? One language and English bridges people. Two languages are dividing people -Tamil is an official language in Sri Lanka (which has less than 2.2m Tamils against 14.8m Sinhalese), let us remind India that Tamil is not an official language in India though it is an official language in Tamil Nadu state -Sri Lanka has a separate color to depict Tamils and Muslims in the country’s national flag – has India shown such a gesture when it has 9/10 of the world’s Tamils in India? -Even in the Madras High Court, the language of the court is NOT Tamil but Hindi! These aspects must be on everyone’s minds when making accusations because politicians only use them as slogans for political mileage and personal benefits

REF: Annex ‘AF’

23

31

ARE TAMILS FACING DISCRIMINATION IN SRI LANKA?

Deepak said …there was no denying ethnic Tamils faces discrimination in Sri Lanka, but you can’t compare Remembrance Day to Tamil Heroes Day.” -What is that the Tamils have been denied in Sri Lanka that other ethnic communities in Sri Lanka enjoy? -If 40% of the population in the capital Colombo is Tamils, what are they doing there if they have been discriminated? -In the one mile long commercial drag in Pettah in Colombo, every second shop is owned by Tamils and patronized by the majority Sinhalese. What the hell are these Tamils doing along Main Street in Pettah if they are discriminated making millions of rupees off their majority Sinhalese patrons? -When the July 1983 riots broke out in Colombo and the Tamils got it bad, not because the alleged discrimination of the Tamils by the majority Sinhalese but a reaction that the Sinhalese had enough crap from these Northern Tamils having terrorized and kicked out 27,000 Sinhalese between 1971 and 1981 from the North where they had lived for generations, and the 13 Sinhalese soldiers who were ambushed and killed by the Tamil Tigers and their bodies were brought to Colombo. By then the Tamils were enjoying a superior education system in the North than from the rest of the country. -In 1983, the predominantly Tamil Jaffna District had 555 government schools for a Tamil student population of 207,524, and the capital city Colombo had only 251 such schools for 231,690 multi-ethnic students. Forty-one per cent of these predominantly Tamil Jaffna District schools had Government approved science laboratories compared to an island average of 19.6 per cent. -When the riots took place in July 1983, the representation of Tamils in the professions was far higher than their ethnic ratio. Unemployment among males were among the majority Sinhalese (14.7%) than Tamils (8.8%). The Physical Quality if Life Indices were higher for Tamils then in Sri Lanka than the general population. And remember my telling that Tamils were a ‘privileged minority’ compared to the majority Sinhalese who ‘were a wronged majority’. -When Colombo was burning and the Tamils were getting the brunt of the Sinhalese anger,

24

the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court was a Tamil, and the Attorney General was a Tamil, and five of the 10 Deputy Inspectors-General of the Police were Tamil and several Diplomatic postings were of Tamils including the Sri Lanka High Commissioner in London. It is time that you accept that you as a Canadian Parliamentarian has no moral authority to speak on discrimination of Tamils in Sri Lanka”, when it was Canada who let the Tamil Tiger rump collect two million dollars a month for 13 years to stuff the Tamil Tiger war chest to buy sophisticated war weapons to kill innocent Sri Lankans in the thousands. By wiping out the most ruthless terrorists in the world, the Tamil Tigers on 19 May 2009, the Mahinda Rajapaksa Government gave back the most treasured item of human rights, the right-to-life to 21 million peoples in Sri Lanka which had been hijacked from them by the Tamil Tiges for 27 bloody year. When 295,873 Tamils were rescued by the Sri Lankan soldiers by 19 May, 2009, who had been used as a human shield by the Tamil Tigers and herded like unwashed cattle for 30 long months and moved from the west coast to the east coast, Canada should have acknowledged and thanked the Sri Lankan armed forces for bringing about this miracle. http://www.lankaweb.com/news/items/2014/12/07/deepak-obhrai-says-tamils-faces-discrimination-in-sri-lanka/

32 WHAT THE TAMIL NATIONAL ALLIANCE IS COMPLAINING ABOUT?

Why the TNA is not held accountable for its links, support and association with the LTTE over the years. If LTTE is held accountable by the UN investigation for any war crimes not only the banned LTTE fronts overseas but the TNA too must be held accountable and charges pressed against them. The same parties and members that were scared to open their mouths except to say ‘Yes’ to everything LTTE ordered, today enjoys freedom of speech and a whole lot of other freedoms that they did not enjoy under LTTE even as Tamils. The TNA leader did not mind surrounding himself with Sinhala body guards then but he does now – what hypocrisy! The Northern Chief Minister lived over 70 years of his life in Colombo but now complains of hearing only Sinhalese voices after living just 3 years in the North. When LTTE made USD300m a year and did nothing to the North, the GOSL gave the Northern Province Rs5.831m of which Wigneswaran and coterie has utilized only 25% as of September 30th 2014. This allocation of Rs.5.831m is the highest allocation of all the provinces in Sri Lanka – what the TNA requested the GOSL gave without question so why has the TNA not spent that money? Moreover as representatives

REF: Annex ‘AG’

25

of the people since 2001 let us ask in what ways did the TNA help the Tamil people:

Did the TNA stop Tamil children from being kidnapped by the LTTE? – NO Did the TNA stop Tamil children from being taken by force to LTTE ‘orphanages’ ? – NO Did the TNA stop Tamil children from being denied their fundamental right to education? – NO Did the TNA question LTTE on why Tamil children were being turned into child soldiers? – NO Did the TNA demand from LTTE that Tamil children be allowed to educate themselves and qualify themselves and become professionals instead of being given a gun and instructions to kill? – NO

33 MISREADING AND

DISTORTING THE SRI LANKA’S WAR 2009-2012

Tamils who have had regular access to the Tamil personnel who were on the ground indicate that the death toll, inclusive of Tamil Tiger personnel, was in the range 10,000 to 16,000. -The campaign has been sustained by a mixture of lies and half-truths amidst truths, compounded further by a wilful blindness to the manner in which the LTTE utilised the Tamil populace in its domain as labour pool, protective shield and bargaining chip meant to induce a ”humanitarian intervention.” -District-size chunk of territory that shrank continuously as the government forces advanced till the Tigers and remaining civilians – roughly 200,000 in crude estimate — were sandwiched into 42 square kilometres in mid-April. -By mid-May 2009, the first estimates of the numbers killed that were presented by Holmes, the UN representative, in Colombo, was 7,721. -Gordon Weiss appeared before the ABC and claimed that the death toll was between 10,000 and 40,000 -Even as late as June 2011 the Times in London referred to 20,000 -The Darusman Report in March 2011 and stated that the original figure of 7,721 was at the lower end of the scale and there could have been “as many as 40,000 deaths.” - In next to no time this speculation became hard fact in news items from prestigious media chains. Thus, Kerry O’Brien of ABC asserted that “40,000 civilians were killed” and spoke of

REF: Annex ‘AH’

26

the “brutal slaughter of humans.” -The Shortcomings of the Darusman Report: It is remarkable that Ban Ki-Moon selected three individuals from a legal background to undertake a survey of a military campaign in a land with which they had limited geographical knowledge and no cultural familiarity. The absence of military expertise and social science capacities are immediately apparent in its coverage. -A balanced review cannot focus on death estimates without placing the figure beside the number of Tamils, both Tiger and genuine civilian, who survived. We now know that at around 280-290,000, including roughly 11,000 deemed Tiger, - Tiger fighters and such leading LTTE functionaries as Daya Master and George Master - emerged alive from the crucible of the Vanni Pocket between January and mid-May 2009. -The shortcoming of Darusman Report is compounded by its refusal to give adequate weight to the character of the LTTE regime. - The LTTE also increased its conscription of civilians to build these defences and replenish its troops. At the same time the civilian population was induced to retreat en masse ahead of the battle lines – moving from west to east. Though subject to multiple displacements, these people faced limited danger at the outset in 2008. But from January 2009 they were in increasing danger of being submerged in the crossfire. This was the LTTE’s intent. The civilians were, now, not only a source of labour and conscripts; they were also hostages shielding the Tigers - The shielding capacity of the mass of civilians was all the more because, from 2008 if not earlier, most Tigers were fighting in check-shirts, trousers, shorts and sarongs. -Weiss and the Darusman Report downplay the significance and focus largely on the government’s role in the injury of “civilians” through indiscriminate shelling. Their estimates of the civilian dead simply gloss over the difficulty of distinguishing civilian and Tiger; and attach little weight to the fact that the LTTE was the creator of this circumstance. -Channel 4 went further in manufacturing a lie: they asserted that the Tamil “civilians were driven from their homes by government forces.” -Some civilians may have died in the course of the war - those who reached safety had gained that “most important human right, namely the right to life;” - “it is a matter of record that soldiers involved in the evacuation have been deeply touched by the tragic situation of civilians.” -Summary: What we have seen in the last four years therefore is a tale of successful dissimulation that has built on half-truths by the addition of lies and the wilful neglect of significant factors. The 40,000 figure on death toll is a surmise that has gained a definitiveness that it cannot bear; while disregarding the extent to which people died through natural causes exacerbated by the starvation diet forced upon them, the high

27

incidence of death by snake bite during journeys through jungle (highlighted by Anandasangaree, the veteran Tamil politician); and failing to enumerate the 600 or so dissident Tamil prisoners executed by the LTTE once they found them a burden

34 INVESTIGATE THE INVESTIGATION (UNHRC /UN AND ITS RESOLUTIONS MUST BE PROBED)

The appointment of a Panel inspite of the GoSL appointing its own panel -Questioning the modalities of the Panel -Questioning the appointment of Maruzuki Darusman as Chairman of the PoE -Appointment of Yasmin Sooka to the PoE. Challenging the 40,000 and more dead figures -Investigate the dead figures -Investigate the Charles Petrie report -Investigate Gordon Weiss -Was there an official NO FIRE ZONE Allegations of Navi Pillai taking case of Sri Lanka -Investigate the credibility of the 3 members appointed by Navi Pillai -Investigate how UNHRC war crimes forms came to be in the hands of TNA-LTTE Investigate the organizations taking an anti-Sri Lanka campaign -Investigate Foreign Parliamentarians coerced into supporting pro--LTTE and taking an anti-SL line using their portfolios -Investigate Channel 4 -Investigate the documentary ‘Lies Agreed Upon -Investigate the 6 Tamil doctors and their affidavits -Investigate all the 16 organizations and 424 individuals most of whom are now holding foreign passports -Investigate the precedent being created

REF: Annex ‘AJ’

35 OHCHR INVESTIGATION ON SRI LANKA: ENGAGEMENT WITH THE GOVERNMENT

The international investigation on Sri Lanka that will be conducted by the United Nations Office of the High Commission for Human Rights (OHCHR) as mandated by the UN Human Rights Council has officially begun in Geneva. The OISL will probe the period from 21 February 2002 until 15 November 2011, the period covered by the Lessons Learnt and Reconciliation Commission (LLRC), from the day the ceasefire agreement was signed to the day LLRC presented its report to the President.

REF: Annex ‘AK’

28

In order to establish the facts and circumstances of alleged violations, abuses and crimes by both parties, the OISL will: -conduct a desk review of existing documents and information, including government and civil society reports, -collect and document victims' testimonies and the accounts of survivors, witnesses and alleged perpetrators, -seek information from other relevant sources such as satellite images, authenticated video and photographic material and official documents. -any state, individual or organization may submit information in writing to the OISL. Submissions to the OISL may be sent to: oisl_submissions@ohchr.org.

36 HOW SRI LANKA COULD BENEFIT FROM UN SECURITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION 1373

To be proactive in action all 192 UN member states need to assist and cooperate with nations incorporating the UNSC Resolution 1373. This then necessitates and binds all UN member states to take action against the 16 organizations declared as LTTE fronts along with those that head these organizations as well as the 424 individuals declared as LTTE supporters. The UNSC Resolution 1373 follows 4 key policies Section 1:

• Prevent and suppress the financing of terrorist acts • Criminalizing terrorist funding (direct and indirect) • Freezing assets of terrorists and any participants or accomplices • Prohibiting citizens from financially aiding terrorists

Section 2: • Member nations must abstain from ‘any form of support, active or passive’ which

would benefit a terrorist or affiliated organization including ‘by suppressing recruitment of members of terrorist groups and eliminating the supply of weapons to terrorists’.

• Member nations required to take ‘necessary steps to prevent the commission of terrorist acts’.

UNSC Resolution 1373 compels nations to 1 Block terrorism financing by freezing assets of individuals and groups on Security

REF: Annex ‘AL’

29

Council watch lists (Has Sri Lanka placed the 16 LTTE fronts, its leaders and the 424 in the UNSC watch list, if not it must immediately do so.

2 Block terrorists from using their territory 3 Block terrorists from recruiting 4 Eliminate access to weapons 5 Deny safe haven to any terrorist members to enter their nations 6 Install new barriers in international migration – LTTE is famed for human

smuggling and asylum/refugee frauds 7 Nations to make sure terrorists are ‘brought to justice’ The recent exposure of frauds in immigration and asylum/refugee appeals in the UK should suffice for authorities to realize that terrorism is cohabitating with other international mafia. How far Sri Lanka has pressed and how much foreign nations are committed to take action honouring the UNSC Resolution 1373 is a good question to now probe. What the Sri Lankan state needs to do is to make open its requests to showcase how far it is making diplomatic appeals to generate cooperation from fellow nations to uphold the binding nature of a global international security legislation.

37 UNHRC INVESTIGATION ON SRI LANKA – REVISITING BAN KI MOONS PANEL OF EXPERT REPORT

5 accusations against GOSL

1 killing of civilians through widespread shelling

2 shelling of hospitals and humanitarian objects

3 denial of humanitarian assistance

4 human rights violations suffered by victims and survivors of the conflict (including both IDPs and LTTE suspects)

5 human rights violations outside the conflict zone including against media and other critics of the Government.

In so far as items 1 to 4 are concerned, the Panel has by its own report shown that apart from making accusations against both to compile its report there is no hard evidence and the likelihood of he said/she said scenario arises. However, item 5 is totally outside the gamut of a conflict and the item should be taken for discussion or debate outside of the investigation that is on the last phase and crimes committed therein by both parties.

REF: Annex ‘AM’

30

6 accusations against LTTE

1. using civilians as a human buffer

2. killing civilians attempting to flee LTTE control

3. using military equipment in the proximity of civilians

4. forced recruitment of children

5. forced labor

6. killing of civilians through suicide attacks

38 SUBMISSIONS TO OHCHR

INVESTIGATION ON SRI LANKA (OISL)

During the last five years, after the end of war in 2009, Sri Lanka has rehabilitated more than 500 child soldiers and nearly 11,000 LTTE cadres and released them to the society. There is no doubt that the reconciliation effort would also be enhanced by such initiatives. United Nations also must find a suitable methodology to treat and rehabilitate the people involved in conflicts. Engaging with the people on any possible violations of human rights, work with them and educate them is more effective than investigations with questionable intentions.

REF: Annex ‘AN’

39

SUBMISSION TO OISL

The OISL experts should take a more judicious and impartial position to evaluate the evidence on both sides of the argument in undertaking the investigation, as professed, to be guided at all times by the principles of independence, impartiality, objectivity, transparency, integrity and do no harm”: - The main accusation against Sri Lanka is that it allegedly killed a large number of civilians indiscriminately, estimates ranging from 40,000 in the Darusman report to 150,000 in Frances Harrison’s book. How plausible are these numbers? - Another major factor bearing on the integrity of the figure of civilians within the NFZ in February 2009 provided was the blurring of the difference between combatant and civilian. -A large number of instances where combatants/conscripts/auxiliaries were routinely treated at civilian medical centres and their deaths included as part of civilian casualty data. -Civilians killed by the LTTE were regularly passed off as fatalities due to shelling –

REF: Annex ‘AP’

31

allegedly always by the Sri Lankan Army. -No doctor in an LTTE-controlled area dared to certify the LTTE as the cause of a death. -That the Army needlessly used heavy weapons in the last weeks since LTTE heavy weapons no longer posed a threat was flawed thinking, for the LTTE used them until May 17th from within the third NFZ. -A critical mistake made by the Panel was in assuming that these weapons were at all times consistently firing up to their maximum permissible range as projected in their illustrations – hence overlapping the No-Fire-Zone. The fire bearings of the artillery and mortar batteries were constantly changing in accord with the changes to the forward defence lines where front line soldiers needed fire support. - The conclusions the AAAS reached having studied the satellite imagery between May 6 and May 10 are striking: What caused the IDP structures to be removed between May 6 and May 10 is uncertain based solely on the imagery. It is notable how complete the removal of IDP structures appears, in that while some debris and evidence of the structures remains, overall the area appears to have been swept relatively clean. This is less indicative of the entire area being razed by shelling, though it could correspond with an emigration from those specific areas by the IDPs due to some outside driver” -The then U.S. Ambassador-at-Large for War Crimes Issues – John Clint Williamson – whilst collecting information in relation to a U.S. Congressional reporting requirement, met with Jacques de Maio, the ICRC’s Head of Operations for South Asia who noted that the Sri Lankan military was somewhat responsive to accusations of violations of International Humanitarian Law (IHL) and was open to adapting its actions to reduce casualties. -On the LTTE, de Maio said that it had tried to keep civilians in the middle of a permanent state of violence. It saw the civilian population as a protective asset” and kept its fighters embedded amongst them. De Maio said that the LTTE commanders’ objective was to keep the distinction between civilian and military assets blurred. -US Ambassador Robert Blake reports to Washington that he told the President on January 8, 2009 that according to General Sarath Fonseka the war could end within two months. But Blake says President Rajapaksa told him that it could take several months more because he was intent on avoiding large-scale civilian casualties”. If not the war would have

32

ended in February 2009. - With regard to accusations of genocide it reflects the level of ignorance of the critics, of the situation in Sri Lanka. It is a little acknowledged fact that only 43 per cent of Sri Lanka’s Tamil population reside in the north. All the rest live among the Sinhalese in the south as they have done for generations. If the government was keen on genocide it had a target much closer. This type of nonsensical argument stems not from ignorance but from their determination to pin the country by fair or foul means. -12,000 of the LTTE cadres who fought the armed forces were detained at the end of hostilities. But the President ordered the army to treat them as your own children”. As a result, except for some 400 who had committed major criminal offences, all the rest were rehabilitated, trained in a trade to help them earn a living, given bank loans on the basis of government guarantee and released back to the community. -Since the end of the war there has been massive investment in the north building houses and infra structure such as roads, schools, hospitals and other facilities to modernise the region that had been badly neglected under 30 years of LTTE rule. Growth rate in the five years since the end of the war was estimated at 22 per cent, which shows the massive scale of investment in the region.

40

UN FAILED TO PROTECT CIVILIANS FROM LTTE

The United Nations failed in its mandate to protect Sri Lankan civilians caught up in the final phases of the Indian Ocean island’s bloody war, a new report has said. “They failed to diagnose the nature of the problem at the early stages and were incapable of designing a coordinated strategy to separate the civilians from the LTTE (rebels) and enable them to move into the government controlled areas.” “In the context of both the lack of contestation of the government’s request and the absence of any negotiation for further time to be provided, the report concludes that the U.N. failed in its protection mandate by relocating,”

REF: Annex ‘AQ’

41 QUESTIONS RAISED ON THE TRANSPARENCY AND INTEGRITY OF THE OISL

On October 25, Krishnarasa who was an ex-LTTE non rehabilitated cadre was taken in for questioning for having in his possession 25 blank submission papers of which six had signatures on them. The six signatures that were on the forms were of persons from Kumalamunai, Mulangavil and Iranamathanagar. These forms were to be subsequently submitted to the OISL Geneva and it is suspected that the blank signatures were obtained with the intention of a third party filling them out later implicating the security forces of human rights violations.

REF: Annex ‘AR’

33

-These vulnerable people had believed this story as they could not read the forms. Hence the information had been collected on the pretext that the TNA is planning to help provide financial and material aid to families who had been affected by the humanitarian operations. -Alva Pulle Vijendrakumar alias Sun Master (presently serving on the TNA advisory panel) had handed over the submission papers and instructed Krishnarasa to collect death certificates of any person who had been killed during the humanitarian operations, personal details of war widows and their national identity card numbers and photographs of disabled persons. Further sun master had instructed him to gather only the signatures of individuals on the forms that he had provided SRI LANKA INVESTIGATION: OHCHR MUST ADMIT OR DENY IT PRINTED SUBMISSION FORMS AND IF MONETARY COMPENSATION WAS PAID FOR TESTIMONIES: UNHRC head needs to only answer if UNHRC war crimes submission forms were printed in Geneva and delivered to the TNA and if monetary compensation was promised in exchange for testimonies THE SIGNATURES ARE GENUINE BUT THE WITNESS ACCOUNT IS FALSE: -On 22nd October 2014, the LTTE unrehabilitated cadre had handed blank forms with signatures to a TNA advisory panel member known as Sun Master. This naturally raises more questions as to how many such forms the LTTE cadre would have handed over. Sun Master however has fled to India. -There are serious doubts as to how many other LTTE cadres would have been given a similar task and how many such blank forms have been thus collected since the announcement of the investigation. -There is also the doubt of the same exercise being carried in countries where Tamil diaspora prevail. We are aware that the GOSL proscribed organizations have launched online appeals via their websites and have set up ‘investigation’ teams to tabulate ‘grievances’. This all leads to the question of who and how many are involved in doctoring information and building up false accounts via ghost writers! -OHCHR head must realize that blank forms and signatures with no date means that there

34

are no bonafide witnesses and the only ‘witnesses’ submitting information to the OISL investigators are some ghost writers putting together falsehoods to corner Sri Lankan troops to war crimes charges. It is appalling to see the lengths people are going to since they have nothing concrete to hold against Sri Lankan troops. -Had it not been for the arrest Sri Lankan troops would have been charged with war crimes and the OHCHR would have kept mum about receipt of forged submission forms – This is what needs to be continuously brought out among member countries of the UN. -The question is if we do not know (only the OISL know but do not say so) how many submissions of the type the LTTE cadre was collecting have actually been submitted to the OISL who have accepted them as ‘genuine’ bondafide witness accounts, the Sri Lankan state has every right to question the OISL investigation on Sri Lanka and declare it has NO

CREDIBILITY whatsoever. - Israel has called it a ‘kangaroo court’

The Sri Lankan envoys need to show the manner in which the OHCHR/UNHRC has treated Sri Lanka following the arrest of the LTTE cadre. That arrest and the revelation and exposure of a well-planned out effort to fix the Sri Lankan soldiers with fraudulent accusations cannot result in the OHCHR head accusing Sri Lanka of ‘continuing a campaign distortion and disinformation’ going on to say that Sri Lanka has been making ‘insidious attempts to prevent possible bonafide witnesses from submitting information to the investigation team’. The Sri Lankan envoys should also query about the OHCHR heads statement that says that they have mechanisms to detect forgeries – if so why has the OHCHR not released that they were in regular receipt of such forms without waiting for the arrest of the LTTE cadre which brought this plot out into the open?

42 INVESTIGATION ON SRI LANKA – A VIOLATION OF THE TIME FRAME GIVEN UNDER UNCHR RESOLUTION

Time Frame covered in UNCHR Resolution A/HRC/25/L.1/Rev.1 Section 10 (b) of the UN HRC resolution A/HRC/25/L.1/Rev.1 dated 26 March 2014 states as follows: To undertake a comprehensive investigation into alleged serious violations and abuses of human rights and related crimes by both parties in Sri Lanka during the period covered by the Lessons Learnt and Reconciliation Commission. Time Frame covered in the Lessons Learnt and Reconciliation Commission (LLRC) is as

REF: Annex ‘AS’

35

follows: “To inquire and report on the following matters that may have taken place during the period between 21st February, 2002 and 19th May, 2009. The ‘time frame’ covered under the UNCHR Resolution A/HRC/25/L.1/Rev.1 has been extended by Navi Pillay’s controversial Panel by misinterpreting the time frame covered in the LLRC: from 21 February 2002 until 15 November 2011, when it presented its report to the President of Sri Lanka

43 UN EXTENDED DEADLINE TO OBTAIN FABRICATED EVIDENCE

UN Human Rights Chief Prince Zeid adopting double standards and extending the deadline for submissions of evidence by the UN investigation an attempt to open the door to fabricated evidence. -The UN had told a group of known persons that they were willing to accept evidence from them despite the expired deadline, despite telling the world that the closing date for submissions was 31 October 2014 -UN probe team had been aware of the gathering of falsified evidence in Sri Lanka. “They needed to open a door for this fabricated evidence,” UN is putting pressure on Sri Lanka to make the country cooperate with the UN probe. “But many countries do not cooperate with such investigations. The UN doesn’t pressurise them,”- pointing to double standards. Some countries do not only refuse to cooperate with UN probes, they do not even submit themselves to the Universal Periodic Review

REF: Annex ‘AT’

44 THE WAR IN SRI LANKA AND PROPAGANDA DEBATES

This Memorandum was sent to Geneva on 14th was acknowledged. -The civilian mass as shield and defensive ‘embankment’ was just one of two pillars in the grand LTTE strategy. -From mid-2008, as they saw potential defeat staring them in the face, the LTTE and its foreign associates began to cultivate the spectre of “an impending humanitarian disaster” in its second pillar. The civilians corralled as so many sandbags were not only a military barrier; they were meant to encourage international outcries and/or intervention which would enforce a CEASEFIRE. The “impending humanitarian disaster” became a central line of LTTE policy. To this end the greater “the evidence” of casualties and death the better. The magnitude of casualties was bloated by the figures/images retailed by Tamilnet and other Tamil media circuits -“Impending humanitarian disaster” became a central line of LTTE policy. The LTTE cleverly disseminated stories of hospitals being shelled and evidence of harrowing casualties through pictorial data as well as reports sent by the medical personnel and the Tamil INGO functionaries in their midst.

REF: Annex ‘AU’

36

-Investigators have not sought testimonies from Drs Shanmugarajah and Sathiyamoorthy in Sri Lanka, while the former’s affidavit on the topic of casualties, medical supplies and continuing operations in trying circumstances - Marie Colvin, a senior hand in The Times of London, the alignment with the LTTE presented in the Sunday Times of 22 March 2009 headlined “Artillery pounds wounded Tamils trapped on beach.” and goes on to assert that “the last hospital in the area was forced to close after twice being bombed by the Sri Lankan army.” It so happens that an established British-trained historian was embedded with the SL Army’s 58th Regiment from 19-21 March as it consolidated its capture of PTK. He immediately challenged this account by posting images of the hospital and describing the arena. His news report, however, was buried and had no bearing on the powerful realms tapped by the Times network What if the Western governments and such agencies as Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International had pooled their voices and told the Tamil spokespersons in the West in late 2008 or early 2009 in adamantine voice that the LTTE had to lay down arms and release the corralled civilians and that they would on no account intervene or demand a ceasefire, THEN what would have happened? Would fewer people have died? Why didn’t USA and others demand unconditional surrender from the LTTE? Why did they not support the Sri Lankan Government’s regular call to the LTTE in 2009 to surrender? The emphasis on “merciless shelling” by the GSL forces has been underlined by a resort to statistical estimates of large numbers of Tamil civilian dead. The UN Panel of Experts appointed by Ban Ki-Moon and Navy Pillai presented a guesstimate of 40,000 civilian dead as a “credible allegation.” This statement was converted into “credible evidence” by Amnesty International, ICG and high profile media spokespersons (e. g. Kerry O’Brien of ABC) in what appears to be a prima facie instance of massaging and dishonesty. In an innovative measure during May-June 2009 the UN agencies in Sri Lanka, marshalled it seems by Gordon Weiss, meticulously compiled figures of the injured IDP Tamils in the hospitals and clinics of the island. They found 18,479 wounded (and estimated 7,721 to have been killed). These statistics are of critical import for any survey of the death toll during the last phase of the war The rough estimates of dead Tamil personnel (Tigers and civilians together) must be set against the figure of 295,873 who survived — a considerable figure in the circumstances;

37

while notice must be taken of the massive relief effort from February 2009 which catered to the needs of the survivors in the detention centres where military men, civilian GSL functionaries and selected local NGOs and several INGOs worked tirelessly in what I consider a remarkable security-cum-welfare operation which stretched over the months 2009 into years

45

EXPOSING THE LIES: WHY THE ‘JOINT STATEMENT’ BETWEEN SRI LANKA AND UN SECRETARY GENERAL IS CONTINUOUSLY REFERRED TO

An investigation against a UN member state can take place based on the following scenarios: -If it is endorsed by the UN General Assembly -If it is endorsed by the UN Security Council -It can also be done as a self-initiative by the UN Secretary General based on 2 criteria: -UN Charter Article 99 which says The Secretary General may bring to the attention of the Security Council any matter which in his opinion may threaten the maintenance of international peace and security.” -Based on a contract or an agreement with the country in question. NONE of the reports to date has been either endorsed, approved or commissioned by either the UN General Assembly or the UN Security Council. The projected ‘contract’ being promoted as prima facie case to establish the UNSG’s right to appoint a panel to investigate Sri Lanka is based on a flimsy concluding para to a joint statement signed on 23 May 2009 after he arrived in Sri Lanka within days of the conclusive defeat of the LTTE.That flimsy sentence in the joint statement reads thus: “The Secretary General underlined the importance of an accountability process for addressing violations of international humanitarian and human rights law. The Government will take measures to address those grievances” (Nowhere does the Sri Lankan Government commit to undertaking an investigation nor does the GOSL agree to an international investigation). Far too many statements have been made public without scrutiny and international condemnation. Failure of Sri Lankan officials to stand up for what is right and on behalf of their country over diplomacy and fear of upsetting fellow nations has led to the abysmal situation Sri Lanka now has fallen into

REF: Annex ‘AV’

38

46

UNHRC INVESTIGATION – IF LTTE IS FOUND GUILTY….WHO AMONG THE LIVING WILL BE HELD ACCOUNTABLE?

Who will be contenders to take the fall and be held accountable for LTTE crimes? The LTTE ground leadership is no more including the LTTE leader – V. Prabakaran. The entire UNHRC investigation is nothing but a sham and one that is being set up to take ONLY the GOSL to the dock. We need to put a list of all those that have been by their actions linked to the LTTE, by their association part of the LTTE, by accepting LTTE funds been associated with the LTTE over the years and it need not necessarily be confined to 2002 – 2009 though we may have to offer some leniency to those who openly gave up association with the LTTE. Who will be contenders to take the fall and be held accountable for LTTE crimes? What are the examples that showcase TNA-LTTE links? - GUILTY BY ASSOCIATION - COLLECTIVE RESPONSIBILITY – COLLECTIVE GUILT We cannot accept the death of LTTE’s leaders and the ground leadership as an excuse for LTTE crimes to go unaccounted. There have to be a host of people lined up to accept accountability at the end of the OHCHR report

REF: Annex ‘AW’

47

SRI LANKA WAR CRIMES ALLEGATIONS CAN HOLD WATER ONLY IF THE ACCUSERS CAN NAME THE DEAD

As things stand neither do we have bodies nor do we have names of the dead. - reports of ‘credible witnesses’ but none of them able to produce even a skeleton! Who are making the accusations? - All the LTTE fronts that the GOSL has proscribed - Gordon Weiss - Frances Harrison - Foreign Parliamentarians linked to proscribed LTTE fronts - Media channels How many civilians were living in the LTTE controlled areas?

-UN Resident Coordinator – 120,000 – 180,000 -Centre for Humanitarian Agencies – 75,000-150,000 -UN Under Secretary General for Humanitarian Affairs and Emergency -Relief – 150,000 – 190,000 -World Food Program – 210,000 -Humanitarian Community – 250,000 -Government Agent in Mullaitivu (Jan 2009) – 305,000

How many civilians in the final ‘No Fire Zone’? -28 days before the LTTE was eliminated the ICRC Director of Operations Pierre

REF: Annex ‘AX’

39

Krahenbuhl: “we put their estimate at 50,000,” -Indian embedded Journalist Murali Reddy on 16th May 2009, said that 50,000 civilians had escaped and corresponds with UN Spokesman Gordon Weiss estimate of 50,000 civilians on 13 May 2009

What are the estimated figures for the dead? -UN Panel of Experts in March 2011: ‘there could have been as many as 40,000 civilian deaths” -UNHRC Head on 13th March Rights stated that 2800 civilians may have been killed and more than 7000 injured since 20 January 2009” -United Nations Country Team Assessment declared 7721 killed and 18,479 injured from August 2008 to 13 May 2009 -Enumeration of Vital events 2011 conducted by the Dept of Census and Statistics on the Northern Province have put the conflict related deaths at 7896 which includes LTTE killed in action. -Statistical remuneration of deaths occurring between 2005 and 2009 in the districts of Jaffna, Mannar, Vavuniya, Mullaitivu, Kilinochchi have given an estimate of 8649 deaths. -UNICEF supported Family Tracing and Reunification Unit in its June 2011 survey of North had only 2564 tracing applications of which 676 were children and 1888 adults -Population estimates by Government, UN, NGOs established the highest population figure of 300,000. The Security Forces saved 293,000 which leaves 7000 to be accounted for (this includes LTTE too) Where is the evidence of the dead? -Satellite Analysis by American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS) discovered only 3 graves highest in which had 1346 buried and one was a LTTE graveyard with 960 dead. Why has the satellites failed to pick 40,000 or more deaths if they did occur? -We do not know how many were LTTE and how many were civilians that did not take part in any form of hostility. -From accounts by Tamils who have sent submissions to the UN Panel, they have admitted that their children were given 5 days of training and put into combat areas leaving them vulnerable to death. If so the Sri Lankan forces cannot be held responsible for these unfortunate deaths. -If war crimes did take place, there has to be deaths, if there are deaths, there have to be bodies and every dead body has to have a name, names of the dead can be given easily by

40

family or there has to be some evidence that they lived (residence address, National ID copy, passport etc) so where are these vital evidence to prove that people had lived to have died. Numbers of death without the dead or the names of the dead or even the skeletons of these dead none of these numbers can hold water and on a ‘may be’ or ‘could be’ the UN panel cannot pin ‘collective responsibility’ or ‘command responsibility’ against Sri Lanka and people they are targeting to be named as war criminals. UN Panel has to establish that 40,000 or more actually died and if the UN Panel says they died they need to name who has died. We are not going to accept numbers without proper factual account of the dead. Wrong guestimates were used in Yugoslavia, Libya and scores of other countries that were targeted for ‘humanitarian intervention’. http://www.lankaweb.com/news/items/2014/11/27/sri-lanka-war-crimes-allegations-can-hold-water-only-if-the-accusers-can-name-the-dead/

48 THE PRESIDENTIAL COMMISSION ON MISSING PERSONS: TRENDS, PRACTICES AND IMPLICATIONS

Centre for Policy Alternatives (CPA) captures key issues and trends observed during public sittings of the Commission and the perceptions of affected communities and civil society who have observed and engaged with the present process:- -The Commission, operating under the Commissions of Inquiry apparatus, is structurally flawed, given its dependence on the Executive for appointments, financing and follow up action -Having observed a string of failed State initiatives at transitional justice in recent years and the lack of progress with past Commissions appointed by successive governments, CPA calls for immediate steps to be taken for legal and policy reform that provides for a genuine and credible domestic process at truth seeking, justice and accountability -Failure in this regard further confirms the inability of domestic processes to address grievances in a post war context and strengthens calls for international investigations http://srilankabrief.org/2014/12/presidential-commission-missing-personstrends-practices-implications/

REF: Annex ‘AY’

41

49

CONTROLLING NGOS: “DEFENCE MINISTRY ACTING BEYOND THE MANDATE”

“The MOD does not enjoy any specific legal authority under any statute whatsoever to control freedom of speech and association of citizens, who act collectively through civil society organisations. The Government of Sri Lanka bans Non Governmental Organisations holding press conferences, couducting work shops, issuing press releases ect. This act amount to clear violation of number of fundermantal rights, including right to information, freedom of expression THE GOVERNMENT CANNOT VIOLATE THE RIGHTS ACTING THROUGH THE MOD: The citizen’s right to freedom of association (under Article 14 (1) (c) of our Constitution) is linked to other freedoms, including freedom of thought and conscience (Article 10), and the right to free speech and expression (Article 14 (1) (a). Group associations, advances these rights. These articles of the Constitution “recognise the right of every Sri Lankan to be different; to think differently; and to have and to express different opinions – not merely a right to dissent privately in silence but to communicate disagreement openly by word, conduct or action by peaceful and lawful means”. “Dissent or disagreement,” is a corner stone of the Constitution….” Democracy requires not merely that dissent be tolerated, but that it be encouraged. “A democratic polity … implies that consent (of the governed to be governed) shall be grounded in adequate information and discussion aided by the widest possible dissemination of information from diverse and antagonistic sources.” A state which has a national constitution guaranteeing the enforceability of citizen’s fundamental rights, and a state which is bound by international law under treaties that it has voluntarily signed, must fulfill legal obligations to citizens under these instruments. The Sri Lankan state has surrendered sovereignty to the extent that it has voluntarily agreed to have its performance reviewed both by its citizens and the community of member states of the United Nations. The government, acting through the Defence establishment, cannot violate the rights of the people that elected it to public office, and justify these violations by referring to state sovereignty

REF: Annex ‘AZ’

50 RELAX MILITARY SURVEILLANCE OVER TAMIL POPULATION

Tamil community including Tamil political leaders, youth activists & journalists are under

constant military surveillance. This restricts rights of Tamils & hinders the reconciliation

process due to the resulting resentment towards the South and the Government. Moreover

it restricts their contribution to a long lasting peace. Hence it is important to relax, if

impossible to remove military surveillance over Tamil population.

REF: Annex ‘BA’

42

51 REVOCATION OF GAZETTE NOTICE CALLING MILITARY FOR CIVIL ADMINISTRATION

Transparency International Sri Lanka (TISL) in a letter to President Mahinda Rajapaksa has urged him to revoke the special gazette notification issued under the Public Security Ordinance to empower the security forces to maintain law and order and transfer the same to the Police. According to the Sri Lankan Constitution, civil administration must be safeguarded during an election period in order to carry out a free and fair election, TISL Executive Director S. Ranugge pointed out in his letter http://www.ft.lk/2014/12/05/tisl-urges-mr-to-revoke-gazette-notice-calling-military-for-civil-administration/

REF: Annex ‘BB’

52 THE SL ARMY GETTING INVOLVED IN POLITICS

Army spokesman crossed an important line in a democratic system by directly taking on an opposition political leader. As a former presidential spokesman, I would contend, that the role of the Army spokesman is to inform the public what the Army may be doing, not comment on what others, especially civilian politicians are doing. The Army getting involved in politics is a really bad idea

REF: Annex ‘BC’

53 MILITARY TO DIS-ENGAGE

FROM THE CIVIL-

ADMINISTRATION IN THE

NORTH & EAST

In the Northern and Eastern provinces the military continues to play an important role in

governance. Despite the end of the war, former military commanders have been appointed

as governors with overriding powers over the civil administration. In the Vanni, the day to

day matters which should to be dealt with by the civilian authorities often have to receive

the final approval of the Civil Affairs Office of the military.

The people who have been resettled could feel they are under military rule. This renders

democracy & election processes useless.

As military rule is not the preferred method of governance in any part of Sri Lanka, it is

essential to dis-engage the military from civil administration in North & East.

REF: Annex ‘BD’

54 MILITARY TO DIS-ENGAGE FROM COMMERCIAL ACTIVITY THAT ADVERSELY IMPACT ON CIVIL SOCIETY – DEPRIVING THEIR LIVELIHOOD

The military is involved in everything from large scale property developments to the

running of roadside cafes. The Army also runs a travel agency called Air Travel Services

(Pvt) Ltd selling air-tickets and foreign package holidays. In the war affected north of the

country, the military operates numerous small restaurants and shops catering mainly for

tourists from the south. In addition to a luxurious holiday resort in North, most of the

roadside cafes along the A9 highway are owned and operated by the Army.

This has deprived people of North & East the opportunity to reap advantages of peace &

REF: Annex ‘BE’

43

improve their industries.

In addition, the military has the unfair advantage of selling products at a much cheaper

price. This adversely affects civilians as they cannot produce goods & services at such

prices. Therefore the military should be mindful to conduct commercial activities at market

prices, so that civilians will not have to shy away from trade & other commercial

activities.But the best option is to dis-engage military from commercial activities.

55

SRI LANKA ARMY TO RETURN MORE GOLD JEWELLERY TO NORTHERN OWNERS

Army to release another stock of gold jewelleries to 1960 more identified rightful owners in the North at a ceremony on December 4, headed by President Mahinda Rajapaksa, after painstaking efforts and the time-consuming verification process that had been undertaken by the Army for accelerated return of those stocks on a special directive of the President. Another total of remaining 419 owners of those recovered jewelleries, is yet to be traced. Handover of gold jewelleries to 2377 legitimate owners in the Northern Province under the first phase completed. http://asiantribune.com/node/85941

REF: Annex ‘BF’

56 OVER 7,500 EX-TIGERS NOW EMPLOYED

ver 7,500 rehabilitated ex-Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE) cadres are employed in various capacities, in Sri Lanka and abroad, M.A Isadeen of the Bureau of the Commissioner General of Rehabilitation said

REF: Annex ‘BG’

57

OVER 18,000 ACRES OF NORTHERN LAND RETURNED

Since 2009 18,044 acres of land in Jaffna have been released to the civilians. In 2009, 4379 acres were released while 6452 acres, 5817 acres, 785 acres and 410 acres were released to the civilians in 2010, 2011, 2012 and 2013 respectively. So far 201 acres of land have been handed back to civil owners this year alone SRI LANKA ARMY SAYS RETURNED 19,500 ACRES OF LAND IN JAFFNA TO CIVILIANS: Military Spokesman and Ministry of Defence, Media Center Director Brigadier Ruwan Wanigasooriya said the land occupied by the Army now has been reduced to 6,500 acres from the original 26,000 acres. He said nearly 20,000 acres of land has been returned to the owners after dismantling around 200 military camps. Currently, Sri Lankan military is occupying an overwhelming amount of land & properties

in North & East provinces. This has proved to have an adverse effect on both the

reconciliation process as well as Sri Lanka’s image. It is essential to return these occupied

REF: Annex ‘BH’

44

land to their rightful owners as the war has ended 5 years ago as LTTE has not shown any

sign of revival in North & East.

58 UN – SPECIAL RAPPORTEUR ON HUMAN RIGHTS VISITS

UN Special Rapporteur on HR of migrants, Francois Crepeau, will visit Sri Lanka from 19th to 26th May 2014. The Special Rapporteur will present a comprehensive report of the visit to the UNHRC in June 2015

REF: Annex ‘BJ’

59

GOSL NAMES AND BANS LTTE FRONTS

The list gazetted in April 2014 declares the leaders of the 4 key factions. Father Emmanuel head of Global Tamil Forum, Rudrakumaran of US based TGTE, Vinyagam based in Brussels and Nediyavan operating from Norway. The last group is the most dangerous and is attempting to oust others by placing their own as heads of the other groups. The hold that the Nediyavan faction has over funds is noteworthy and requires the GOSL to use every diplomatic means to seek the arrest of Nediyavan and extradition to Sri Lanka to be charged for criminal and terror acts

REF: Annex ‘BK’

60 UN: SRI LANKA SHOULD PROTECT MIGRANTS FROM ABUSE

With nearly 2 million of its citizens working abroad and their remittances providing the island’s largest single source of foreign exchange, the protection of Sri Lankan migrants is an urgent issue, according to the U.N.. Abuse of workers abroad and reports about the mistreatment of migrants captured by Australian authorities at sea mean there is a spotlight on the Sri Lankan government’s new “action plan” for dealing with returning and reintegrating migrants. “Issues of safety, abuse, exploitation and harassment continue to plague Sri Lankan migrant workers. As a country reliant on export of labour, authorities should urgently address them,” “There had been reports of mutilated bodies being returned to Sri Lanka, at times, with missing organs. Autopsies are not performed in Sri Lanka and the families are often not allowed to see these bodies,” The U.N. Special Rapporteur on Human Rights of Migrants, Francois Crepeau, told Anadolu Agency that Sri Lanka needs to take specific measures to better protect people on the move; from labourers in dour conditions abroad to Sri Lankans who flee the country in desperation. http://srilankabrief.org/2015/02/un-sri-lanka-protect-migrants-abuse/

REF: Annex ‘BL’

45

WHAT IS THE SCOPE OF NATIONAL RECONCILIATION? Annex ‘A’ People, including scholars, are talking about national reconciliation in Sri Lanka. They are blindly following the transitional justice model proposed by Western scholars to deal generally with post conflict situations. They say former enemies may have a long history of violence between them and may find themselves faced with the challenge of implementing a new negotiated structure for the future management of their differences. They then argue that one of the biggest obstacles to such future cooperation is that, because of the violence of the past, their relations are based on antagonism, distrust, disrespect, hurt and hatred. But how true is this in the case of the Sri Lankan context? No personal hatred But what I noticed even during the long war was that there was little or no personal animosity by the Sinhalese to the Tamils in the south. I am not sure about the border villages, but leaving them out, I think there was no mutual animosity between the ordinary Sinhalese and the Tamils. During the 1983 riots many Sinhalese befriended Tamils. Similarly there is no personal hatred towards the Sinhalese among the Tamils. But the models of transitional justice postulated by Western scholars take such animosity and the need for reconciliation for granted. One of the biggest obstacles to resolution of the problem they say is the violence of the past, when their relations were based on antagonism, distrust, disrespect hurt and hatred. “If the crimes during the war are somehow proved to the satisfaction of the UN, a need for national reconciliation will arise. The Tamil people will have to decide then whether despite the proved brutality (if proved) with which the regime is alleged to have prosecuted the war, whether they would consider being part of the same State or not. They of course cannot forget the similar or worse brutality of the LTTE. It is then that the need for national reconciliation will arise. Will there be a demand from the UN by the Tamil diaspora to carry out its responsibility to protect?” But right from 1956 the Tamil campaign against ‘Sinhala Only’ was opposed with violence, mainly by mobs commissioned by interested politicians. They were not a spontaneous outburst of anger by the ordinary Sinhalese against the Tamil politicians. The situation changed after the LTTE emerged with war and violence. Even then Tamils lived among the Sinhalese in the south and several Tamils from the north took refuge in Colombo to escape the extortion and demands of the LTTE. So here in Sri Lanka, despite both communities having suffered severely during the war, my impression is that except in border areas and with the Army, the Tamil people are not having personal animosity towards the Sinhalese as such. Hostility of the Tamil diaspora

46

But no one can miss the hostility of the Tamil diaspora, but that is not directed against the Sinhala people at large but at the regime in power. They have levelled incredible allegations of crimes during the last stages of the war committed by the present regime. These allegations have been denied by the authorities. But they will not just go away. They have appeared and re-appeared in the international media. In fairness to the UN it has been urging the regime to hold a domestic inquiry where all crimes can be investigated. Even during the war the Penal Code is not repealed for the Police and the Army and those who murdered the three university students and the 17 aid workers should have been brought to justice, since they were not part of the war. So it is natural that the Tamil diaspora and the present regime hate each other. But human beings, being what they are, such animosity and hatred tend to be projected to those of the same kind. So the regime doesn’t trust the Tamil National Alliance and will not allow it the space to function as a democratic political force. Similar actions in the past by Sinhala governments led to the failure of the Tamil democratic parties and their replacement by the LTTE which believed that there was no solution except Eelam and that it was to be obtained through armed struggle only. Regime and diaspora reconciliation required So the problem as I see it is not the need for national reconciliation but the need for reconciliation by the regime with the Tamil diaspora and the Tamil political leadership. Can such reconciliation take place when the diaspora is making allegations of crimes and brutalities in the last stage of the war in violation of the laws of war? It was worth a try. So the need for reconciliation is not between the Sinhala and the Tamil people but between the present regime, the Tamil diaspora and the Tamil political leadership. Into the fray of course the LTTE remnant seems also to be seeking to enter and reassert itself. There have been no discussions between the present regime and the Tamil diaspora. Nor have there been discussions about the allegations of crimes during the last stage of the war been discussed with the TNA. Time seems to be running out for the UN HCR is expected to name their Commission. Need for national reconciliation Although the need for national reconciliation between the Sinhala and Tamil people may not be a pressing issue now, it may assume importance if the allegations of crimes during the war are proved. It will be difficult for any people to forgive or forget if such brutal crimes as alleged were in fact committed against their kith and kin. It is then that the need for national reconciliation will arise. As it is the Tamil people know that the LTTE committed heinous crimes against innocent Sinhalese and do not condone it and seem willing to let bygones be bygones. But the attitude may change if they realise that the regime has actually acted brutally and in uncivilised ways. Turkish Empire

47

This sort of reaction took place in the Turkish Empire. There were riots and uprisings against the Turkish rule during the days of the Turkish Empire. The Greeks revolted and they were brutally suppressed. The Armenians, who sided the Russians during World War I, were massacred, but to this day the Turks deny it. But Europe was horrified and accepted the claim for secession from the Turks by the ethnic and religious minorities since they assumed that such barbarism was second nature to the Turks. The minorities included the Arabs of the Middle East who also revolted. They were all crushed with the same brute force. But it sealed the fate of the Turkish Empire. In the 1980s, an armed insurgency of the Kurds challenged the Turkish state, which responded with martial law. The Kurds were scattered in several Arab states like Iraq, Syria and Iran After the 1991 Gulf War, Iraqi Kurds were protected against the armies of Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein by NATO-enforced no fly zones, allowing them considerable autonomy and self-government without the control of the Iraqi Central Government. After the 2003 invasion of Iraq by ousted dictator Saddam Hussein, Iraqi Kurdistan became an autonomous region, enjoying a great measure of self-governance but stopping short of full independence. Responsibility to protect? So if the crimes during the war are somehow proved to the satisfaction of the UN, a need for national reconciliation will arise. The Tamil people will have to decide then whether despite the proved brutality (if proved) with which the regime is alleged to have prosecuted the war, whether they would consider being part of the same State or not. They of course cannot forget the similar or worse brutality of the LTTE. It is then that the need for national reconciliation will arise. Will there be a demand from the UN by the Tamil diaspora to carry out its responsibility to protect? QUESTION IS NOT WAR AGAINST LTTE; BUT WAR ON CIVILIANS Annex ‘B’ I wish to first refer to the investigation which has been mandated by the United Nations Human Rights Council, which has appointed a panel of investigators and a panel of experts. These persons have been appointed by the UN establishment. They have not been allowed to enter the country. They cannot carry out any investigations or record any evidence in Sri Lanka. If I might say so, with respect, this is clearly not consistent with the conduct of a party that proclaims innocence. At the time of the military operations and until shortly thereafter, the Sri Lankan Government’s position was that it was conducting a humanitarian operation with the policy of zero civilian casualty. This was the Sri Lankan position when the war came to an end. The true position, however, seems very different. No one can blame the Sri Lankan Government for conducting a war against the LTTE. Different considerations apply in relation to civilians.

48

The Government estimated the civilian population in that area, the Wanni, where the war was raging at around 70,000. Eventually around 290,000 civilians came out from that area. The true figure of the people there is believed to be over 350,000 civilians. Government officials and civil society activists have testified to that effect. It was a war conducted without any independent witnesses. Members of Non-Governmental Organizations and International Non-Governmental Organizations were asked to leave that area in September, 2008 without consideration of the consequent harm to the civilian population in that area, because it was these voluntary organizations that were till then largely responsible for supplying the population in that area with drinking water, food, medicine and shelter, particularly in the context of the Government’s gross underestimation of the total population in that area. The ICRC and the UN personnel were asked to leave that area. They were not able to fulfil their mandate in regard to humanitarian and protection issues. The media, both domestic and international, were kept out of that area. Members of Parliament were not permitted to go to that area. Persons who came out of that area – eventually about 290,000 persons came out – were detained in detention centres called, “welfare centres”. We placed on record in Parliament all that happened at that time, as and when, it happened. What we said in Parliament was not contradicted. Grave civilian casualties raised issues in regard to violations of International Human Rights and International Humanitarian Laws. The matter was eventually taken up by the Human Rights Council. Three Resolutions have been adopted by the UN Human Rights Council, the latest one being in March 2014, which authorized an independent international investigation. This could have been averted if the Sri Lankan Government had set up a credible, transparent, domestic investigation after the adoption of the Resolutions in 2012 and 2013. Now, the international investigators and the Panel of Experts appointed by the UN establishment are being denied entry into Sri Lanka. Citizens of this country who are possessed of the knowledge and information and who are able and willing to testify before the international investigators in regard to what happened to them and their compatriots are being denied their legitimate right to do so. This is a denial of their fundamental rights as citizens of this country. This is also a blatant denial of their right to justice. Meanwhile, the Sri Lankan Government, through persons in authority, has been publicly stating that any one who testifies before or assists the investigation in any way would be violating Sri Lanka’s Constitution or its laws and would be prosecuted. This is clearly intended to intimidate witnesses and prevent them from making available information or giving evidence on matters within their knowledge, matters that are known to them. I wish to pose the question whether such action would serve the long-term interests of this country though it may serve the short-term interests of some individuals. No witnesses and victims protection law exists in this country. A Bill was brought to Parliament sometime around 2007/2008, at the time when the Udalagama Commission was investigating certain grave violations of human rights. The Bill was taken up for debate and thereafter, it was abandoned. There had been commitments made to the international community that the victim and witnesses protection law will be passed in this country, but that commitment has not yet been kept. While on this matter, Sir, I need to refer to a news item that appeared in “The Island” newspaper on Saturday, the 1st of November. I want to specifically deny the correctness of that report. The TNA has no official by the name referred to in that report, nor has the TNA engaged in collecting any such documents as is alleged in that report.

49

While the TNA laments that citizens of this country are being denied the opportunity of appearing before and testifying before an investigative panel appointed by the UN, the TNA is certainly not engaged in any activity, which would not be in conformity with the required standards of such investigative processes. In the Joint Communiqué, Sir, issued by the President and the Secretary-General of the United Nations on the conclusion of the visit of the Secretary-General of the UN to Sri Lanka on 23rd May, 2009, the Sri Lankan Government committed itself to address the question of accountability. Accountability and reconciliation can be addressed meaningfully only through genuine, credible processes. They cannot be addressed through processes that are spurious and such processes cannot achieve the desired results. The Sri Lankan Government, in my submission, needs to rethink its whole approach to this question of accountability and reconciliation in the long-term interests of this country. Before I get on to my next point, Sir, may I have your indulgence to refer to some observations made by the Internal Panel appointed to review the working of the UN during the crucial stages of the war in Sri Lanka, certain observations made by the Secretary-General of the UN himself and also certain observations made by the International Independent Group of Eminent Persons who served in Sri Lanka at the time of the functioning of the Udalagama Commission that was tasked with the responsibility of investigating certain grave violations of human rights. Sir, this is what the Report of the Internal Panel appointed to review the working of the UN during the final stages of the war stated. In fact, there was some dissatisfaction with the way in which the UN establishment functioned during the final stages of the war and this Panel was appointed to go into that question. The Panel stated, I quote: “Between August 2008 and May 2009, as the war between the Government of Sri Lanka and the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE) entered its final stages, an estimated 360,000 or more civilians were crowded into an ever smaller part of ‘the Wanni’ area of Northern Sri Lanka where many died as a result of sustained artillery shelling, illness and starvation. Almost 280,000 survivors were forcibly interned in military-run camps outside the area of conflict.” A further observation they make is, I quote: “The UN’s failure to adequately counter the Government’s under-estimation of population numbers in the Wanni, the failure to adequately confront the Government on its obstructions to humanitarian assistance, the unwillingness of the UN in UNHQ and Colombo to address Government responsibility for attacks that were killing civilians, and the tone and content of UN communications with the Government and Member States on these issues, contributed to the unfolding of dramatic events.” The third observation in regard to the Report of this Panel is, I quote:

50

“Sri Lanka’s peaceful and stable progress will require a process of accountability and reconciliation and a political solution to the long-standing grievances of all communities, as well as a response to ongoing and new concerns, and prevention and protection in the future. Working closely with the Government of Sri Lanka, the UN needs to take on this further challenge.” The Panel of Experts, Sir, in their Report, emphasized the need to address accountability and reconciliation in a meaningful way and also emphasized the fact that if accountability and reconciliation were to be addressed in a meaningful way, in a way in which the entire citizenry in this country could accept it, there had to be a political solution. That political solution would enthuse the question of accountability and reconciliation to be addressed in a moderate, reasonable and sensible way. I wish to quote, as I mentioned earlier, certain remarks made by the UN Secretary-General in September, 2013. In fact, when he made these remarks His Excellency President Mahinda Rajapaksa himself was personally present. I quote : “In a rare admission of “systemic failure” of the UN, its chief has said the world body had failed during the final stages of Sri Lanka’s ethnic war in 2009 that saw military defeat of the LTTE. Ban made the remarks while addressing the UN General Assembly’s 68th session on Tuesday where Sri Lankan President Mahinda Rajapaksa was also present.” These remarks were made in the presence of President Mahinda Rajapaksa. I further quote: “The Secretary-General said as an immediate step, he will organize a senior-level team to give ‘careful consideration’ to the report’s recommendations and advise him on the way forward. ‘Other action will follow in short order’, he said” So, in other words Sir, the Secretary-General himself had accepted the fact that there have been certain failures by the UN establishment during certain crucial stages of the war, which needed to be addressed and that those issues are being investigated by the UN system through their internal processes. I also want to refer finally, Sir, to certain observations made by the International Independent Group of Eminent Persons – IIGEP – when they were in Sri Lanka assisting the Udalagama Commission at the final Press Conference they held on 14th April 2008 before they withdrew from their mandate and left the country. At the final media briefing of the IIGEP on 14th April of 2008, the results of intense military action taken by the Sri Lankan Government against the LTTE having a harmful impact on the Tamil civilians came up and the IIGEP’s response was that such a situation would amount to a clear violation of international human rights and humanitarian laws and would inevitably have its own consequences. The International Independent Group of Eminent Persons comprised of 11 persons from different countries the world over, was chaired by the retired Chief Justice of India, Justice P.N. Bhagwati. This is the observation they made, Sir.

51

Finally they said, I quote: “Summary executions, massacres, disappearances, wanton destruction of property and forcible transfer of population can never be justified. No efforts should be spared to uncover responsibility, including recognition of command responsibility, for such actions. The IIGEP has, however, found an absence of will on the part of the Government of Sri Lanka in the present inquiry to investigate cases with vigour, where the conduct of its own forces has been called into question.” That was in reference to the matters being investigated by the Udalagama Commission and the role of the International Independent Group of Eminent Persons to assist and guide that Commission. In the course of that final interview, Sir, it so happened that a journalist who was aware of the situation in the North and the East at that point of time, raised this question of what the impact would be on international human rights and humanitarian laws if the Sri Lankan Government disregarding the rights of civilians, disregarding the safety of civilians, disregarding the entitlement of civilians, carried out a ruthless operation against the LTTE and the answer given by them clearly was that it would be unacceptable; that it would be in violation of international humanitarian and international human rights laws. And, exactly all that they quoted as being the possibility: massacre, summary executions, disappearances, displacement, destruction, all of it happened in the course of the war in its final stages. IDEAS FOR A ROAD MAP FOR TRUTH AND JUSTICE IN SRI LANKA Annex ‘C’ The new year has brought significant changes in Sri Lanka. President Maithripala Sirisena and his Government face many challenges and opportunities. Reform has been promised and expectations are high. In the wake of the elections, Pope Francis’ visit to Sri Lanka to canonize the country’s first saint was a highlight. Those involved in setting out the reform agenda should use his arrival speech as a guide, with specific attention to the following words: “The process of healing also needs to include the pursuit of truth, not for the sake of opening old wounds, but rather as a necessary means of promoting justice, healing and unity.” Such sentiments are missing in the Sirisena Government’s official documents and statements. This article briefly sets out why addressing truth and justice are critical if we as Sri Lankans are to have a chance at genuine and long-term reconciliation. Attempts at Addressing the Culture of Impunity The lack of a political will to pursue independent investigations and prosecute perpetrators is a key factor contributing to the culture of impunity in Sri Lanka. Another is the legacy of a flawed legal framework and the lack of capacity with the existing actors to deal with mass scale violations. For example, the Commission of Inquiry Act, which provides for the appointment of Presidential Commissions, provides broad powers to the Executive to appoint investigations and decide on its outcomes. The absence of a comprehensive victim and witness protection mechanism has also impeded investigations, with reports highlighting the intimidation, threats and attacks against people who come forward to give evidence. These are some of the areas the new government must address when introducing reform in the coming weeks. The silence, inaction and empty promises regarding these pertinent issues shaped the legacy of the Rajapaksa Government and alienated it from a significant population in Sri Lanka. It is time to learn from such mistakes and heed calls for truth, justice and accountability. It is time to address the culture of impunity.

52

Calls for truth and justice, be they related to the war, the southern insurrection or in the post-war context, have been numerous and varied. Families of the disappeared have for years gone before numerous police stations, military camps, committees and commissions of inquiries (COIs) in search of their missing loved ones. Many have protested and held silent vigils across Sri Lanka. Despite these efforts, most have yet to obtain official acknowledgement from the State that their loved ones are missing. The present Presidential Commission to Investigate into Complaints Regarding Missing Persons (Commission), appointed by then-President Rajapaksa in 2013, has received over 20,000 complaints. Civil society and media have critiqued this Commission for the delays in processing complaints, lack of victim and witness protection and for shifting its primary focus of missing persons to a others including international humanitarian law (IHL) violations. Despite the commission’s flaws, the thousands who have complained is a testament to the gravity of disappearances and their ongoing effect on the communities that continue to search for missing persons. Similarly, many other incidents of violence and violations where the State has promised investigations are yet to lead to perpetrators being held to account. If one looks at the Commission of Inquiry that was appointed to investigate and inquire into 16 cases of past violations (also known as the Udalagama Commission), no public information is available on the status of the cases despite the commissioners handing over the findings of the investigations to the Executive in 2009. The Lessons Learnt and Reconciliation Commission (LLRC), another entity appointed by then-President Rajapaksa, referenced two cases that were before the Udalagama Commission, the killing of the five youth in Trincomalee and the ACF killings both dating to 2006, as requiring further investigation. Nine years into the killings, and after many promises and pledges from the then-Government, the survivors and families are yet to obtain any information whether any credible investigations have taken place. In terms of previous initiatives for truth and justice, it is worth noting that domestic investigations have in most instances been in response to public outrage and national and international pressures. Both the LLRC and the Udalagama Commission were established by then-President Rajapaksa as a direct result of international pressure to address violations and the culture of impunity. The promises to investigate killing of protestors in the Free Trade Zone and Chilaw resulted from public condemnation of the abuse of power, but have yet to result in credible processes where perpetrators have been held to account. Killings and abductions of media actors have also had similar results. The few cases in which perpetrators have been convicted, such as the case of the killing of British national Khuram Shaikh, are largely due to intense pressure from national and international actors. But such cases of successful convictions are rare. In most instances survivors and families languish for years searching for justice. Reform Agenda to Meet the Needs of the People Just over a week into the Sirisena Government, the establishment of the National Executive Council and the appointment of a respected former civil servant as the Governor of the Northern Province are welcome. Reform, though, must be at a deeper level. The Sirisena Government must demonstrate a shift in policy in terms of recognizing the past and addressing ongoing violations. The Rajapaksa Government attempted to demonstrate that economic development was a panacea, with little attention given to other grievances of communities across Sri Lanka. The Sirisena Government should note the flaws of such a line and acknowledge the legitimate grievances of communities in the North, East and South of Sri Lanka. The large turnout in the North on election day, despite intimidation and attempts to confuse voters, is a testament to the rejection of the previous Government’s policies and the desire for change. “We voted to get back our dignity back”, a quote from a person in the North reported in the media goes to the heart of the problem. The development, urbanization, and beautification initiatives of the past few years do not make up for concurrent violations of people’s rights, including evicting them from their own homes or preventing return to their own lands. Respecting people’s rights and

53

dignity is of paramount importance to changing the country’s political culture. The present Government should take note of these basic issues when pushing forward with their 100-day plan and longer-term initiatives. One can read the Rajapaksa Government’s human rights and reconciliation policies in the National Human Rights Action Plan and the National Action Plan for the LLRC, both with identified action points, actors and time frames for implementation. Despite this, many questions remain regarding progress and impact. Such initiatives, while good on paper, made little impact with the people. In moving forward, the new Government should articulate its positions in terms of rights protection, truth, justice, accountability and reconciliation. Although the 100-day plan is ambitious and identifies areas for reform, a missing piece is truth and justice. It is timely for the Government to examine, acknowledge and understand the past to avoid a recurrence of violence and to help introduce initiatives and processes to heal the wounds and divisions within society. In this regard, attention should be on a road map with benchmarks and timeframes to address truth and justice, with the target of long-term and sustainable reconciliation. The process should be inclusive and transparent, involving all relevant stakeholders. Also important is to ensure that initiatives and processes include gender-sensitive perspectives, including problems faced by single-headed households and women who faced and continue to face security threats. A Road Map & Next Steps It is important to be able to articulate the Government’s positions and priorities. A road map should answer this question, and also build confidence in the public of a larger willingness to acknowledge the past and of a government that will ensure credible domestic processes are able to address the grievances of the people. At the outset there must be a reframing and rethinking of positions in terms of truth, justice, accountability and reconciliation. The complete denial of serious human rights violations and aggression towards anyone calling for accountability for past violations must change. Already there is a shift in this policy to one where the Government has indicated an interest to engage with actors involved in justice and accountability, including the investigation by the United Nations Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights. This is welcome, but more is needed in terms of substantive changes. A road map can help in this regard. The Joinet/Oretlicher Principles to combat impunity and the four pillars it advances are useful in this regard: the right to truth, right to justice, the right to reparations and the guarantee of non-recurrence. The four main areas discussed below are not exhaustive, but highlights areas important in the Sri Lankan context and sets the stage for further initiatives. Importance of Truth-Telling The search for the truth continues for many conflict-affected Sri Lankans, but present processes have failed to provide answers. This area urgently requires reform. The new Government should review the Commission of Inquiry Act to see whether amendments can ensure future COIs work independently and make their findings public. In terms of legislative reform, they should also revisit the possibility of enacting victim and witness protection legislation that provides for an effective protection mechanism.

54

The reform agenda should also examine new modalities to address truth and justice, including new entities such as something on the lines of a truth commission. Truth-telling processes are important as they provide a space for victims, survivors and affected communities to be heard and to have public acknowledgement of what happened in the past. Truth commissions can also make recommendations for next steps, including reparations, trials and initiating state reforms that include the introduction of guarantees of non-recurrence of human rights violations and respect for the rights of all citizens. Regarding a possible process for truth-telling, the South African-style Truth and Reconciliation Commission (SATRC) has been mooted previously. Although the SATRC is well known, when designing a process suitable for Sri Lanka, policymakers should also look at other initiatives, including those in Argentina, Chile and Sierra Leone and the most recently concluded Brazilian National Truth Commission. The Argentinian National Commission on the Disappearance of Persons (CONADEP) provided a comprehensive report titled ‘Nunca Mas’ (Never Again), which was followed by the then Argentinian Government lifting amnesties provided to the military junta and initiating domestic trials that lead to the convictions of perpetrators. The Brazilian Commission also raises amnesties and recommends they be lifted to try perpetrators of serious human rights violations. There is no one formula as to what is best for Sri Lanka. The Government must examine different modalities and design an initiative that is best suited for the Sri Lankan context. This must include benchmarks for independence, impartiality, transparency and protection for victims and witnesses. Those discussing modalities for truth-telling processes should examine reports of past commissions and identify action points for the short, medium and long term. Although many reports are not in the public domain, the few that are available such as the LLRC provide constructive action points and can be useful guides in the reform debates. It is also important to make the reports of past COIs public. Steps to End the Culture of Impunity Reform should not only be limited to finding the truth, but must also address justice and accountability. Reform is critical in light of the slow progress in indicting and prosecuting perpetrators of serious human rights violations. The Attorney General’s Department’s capacity to handle more cases of past violations is questionable. A special office to examine specific cases, with a fixed term limit in its operations, would do much to alleviate this burden. Such an office should have the mandate to investigate, indict and prosecute cases of serious human rights violations. The establishment of a special office to investigate serious human rights violations and commence proceedings can also send a message that addressing accountability is priority. This, though, is a mechanism that will be dependent on staffing and resources. Additionally, prosecutions will not happen in a vacuum; efforts at introducing reform must factor in constitutional reform to provide for an independent judiciary, and also technical support to build the capacity of judges and court staff. Legislative reform must also strengthen a citizen’s ability to initiate proceedings in terms of serious human rights violations in situations in which the State has failed to take action. At present the fundamental rights chapter in the Constitution provides for a petition to be filed in the Supreme Court when there is a violation or an imminent infringement of the fundamental rights provided. Legislators should review other countries to find examples of processes that provide their citizens with better access to justice. For example, in Argentina, private prosecutions can hold perpetrators of serious human rights violations to account without relying solely on State machinery. The ability of a citizen to take action has contributed to greater

55

accountability and addressing the culture of impunity in Argentina. The Government should consider such a process in light of the present set up, which has failed victims. However, only legislative reform and appropriate technical support will make this a feasible option. To end impunity, it is also important for the Government to take a position in terms of amnesties for serious human rights violations. Although the SATRC offered amnesties when specific conditions were met, recent practices in other contexts—Argentina, Chile, and Uruguay—have seen the overturning of amnesty laws in the face of grave violations of war crimes, crimes against humanity and genocide. A clear message should be sent that perpetrators of serious human rights violations, regardless of rank and position, will be held to account. Preventing the recurrence of violence is closely connected to ending a culture of impunity. In this regard institutional and structural reform must also include the judiciary, the security sector and those institutions which were complicit in the violations. Finally, both the State and civil society should invest in systematic archiving of documents and other resources, which can facilitate in raising awareness of the past and be an informative tool for future generations as they also strive to remember the past and prevent the recurrence of rights violations. Memorialisation Memorials can play an important part in remembering and recognizing the past and also in providing a space for victims, survivors and affected communities to mourn the dead. Memorials built during the post-war context in Sri Lanka have only facilitated one narrative, that of the triumphalist victor, with no space for the multiple narratives of the victims and survivors. It is essential that space be provided across Sri Lanka for memorialization at the different levels that reflect the grievances of the people. It is important that the Government initiates a consultation in this regard with relevant stakeholders, involving survivors, families, affected communities, civil society, artists and academia, to identify areas to consider in creating, identifying and maintaining memory spaces. Memorial spaces in other countries that faced violence have been provided by the State, private institutions and the public. There is no one formula but it is important that it is an inclusive process. The Constitutional Court in South Africa based in the Old Fort Prison premises is now transformed to capture past events and be a memorial. In Argentina, the former secret detention center named ESMA is now a memory space with a state-sponsored archival center and the Haroldo Conti Cultural Center named after a journalist who was abducted and killed by the military junta. Those considering Sri Lanka’s needs should look at these and other examples across the globe. The new Government must also provide space to mourn the dead. Previous years saw crackdowns on those who attempted to mourn deaths from the final stage of the war. These crackdowns halted religious ceremonies and disrupted community meetings. Such arbitrary restrictions must immediately stop and the government must create and support spaces for communities to mourn their dead with dignity. Reparations Providing reparations is an important component for reconciliation and is a recognition and protection of individual rights. The State has to provide redress for past abuse; this can include compensation, rehabilitation and restitution. Reparations can be both financial and non-financial. For example, for land and property loss/damages, initiatives may provide for people to return to their land and compensate them for damages.

56

Authorities can take steps to provide death certificates for those disappeared after conducting independent investigations. The Government should appoint officials to examine problems related to land occupation, property damage, livelihoods, disappearances and detentions. In terms of land occupation, the Ministry of Land and Ministry of Defence should immediately assess the extent of land occupied by the military and other state entities and return lands to their legal owners. Land required for public purposes should be acquired in terms of the legal provisions provided in the Land Acquisition Act. The above are some ideas to start prioritizing truth and justice in the reform debates in Sri Lanka. The work of the next few weeks and months will define the legacy of President Sirisena and his Government. It is therefore fundamental that the Government considers and take action to address the legitimate grievances of all citizens and end the silence in Sri Lanka. TRUTH AND ACCOUNTABILITY: CORRUPTION, HUMAN RIGHTS ABUSES AND WAR CRIMES Annex ‘D’ While the government may be able to successfully introduce constitutional reforms to curb the powers of the Executive and rehabilitate the electoral system, its economic policies will not produce many tangible results in just 100 days, as the public may expect. The government’s survival in the next general election is likely to be largely determined by how it responds to the two-pronged issue of justice: corruption under the Rajapaksa regime, and accountability for allegations of human rights abuses and war crimes committed during the last phase of the Sri Lankan civil war. These two issues are equally important and interconnected, and prioritizing one over the other could cost the government the next election. The reasons for the Rajapaksa regime’s rise and fall, and the public’s trust in the Maithripala regime’s promise of good governance, are inextricably related to these two issues. One can understand the Rajapaksa regime’s survival for ten years – despite its record of abuses of power and dismantling of democracy – and its subsequent fall, only in relation to the means by which it maintained power. Its skillful manipulation of public fears legitimized its denial and procrastination of fulfilling domestic and international obligations. In doing so, it was able to avoid accountability for allegations of human rights abuses during and after the war, and deflect attention away from its failure to provide meaningful devolution of power to the country’s northern and eastern regions. The Maithripala government cannot save the country from such a dark political legacy if those accused of corruption escape scrutiny. Nor can it ignore domestic and international demands for accountability and transitional justice. To do so risks falling prey to diabolical extremists who have made the rather preposterous claim that giving into those demands is hostile and diametrically opposed to the existential interests of the Sinhala community. It is equally important not to provide opportunities for those sinister forces conspiring to prevent the Tamil community from collaborating with government. The government’s responses to these challenges will determine its success in restoring good governance and justice, although these challenges do not necessarily arise from the same context and require different responses. The consequences of revealing the truth about corruption is no different to revealing the truth about human rights abuses and war crimes. Corruption

57

President Sirisena himself acknowledged the slow progress of bringing culprits to justice. The majority welcomes his decision to appoint a presidential commission to investigate corruption charges. However, its success depends on whether the government empowers it to carry out its tasks and insulates it from undue political and other interference. Here, the government faces a dilemma. First, it cannot afford to make legal and political blunders by rushing the investigations just because they form part of an election pledge. Nor can it spend all its time and resources addressing the issue of corruption at the expense of fulfilling its other promises in its 100-day plan. Second, delaying bringing to justice those responsible will undermine the government’s credibility. More importantly, it will undermine the justice system’s credibility and could even cost the government the next parliamentary election. The government’s opponents will exploit both to destabilize the government, forcing the government to rush and devote the majority of its time and resources to deal with corruption. Any delay could produce similar results, benefiting the opposition. The best option for the president is to fearlessly pursue truth and justice regardless of the short-term political risks, to avoid a backlash will boomerang. The government may be slow to act on charges of corruption, but those accused are not! High-ranking politicians of the previous regime, including Vinayagamoorthy Muralitharan, a parliamentarian, former minister of the Rajapaksa regime, and LTTE colonel, are aggressively waging a public relations campaign to discredit the charges. Utilizing parliamentary sources, and domestic and international media, their strategy is to raise questions about the consistency and accuracy of the government’s charges. If the government fails to prove the allegations, those accused are likely to be vindicated in the public’s eyes. People will perceive the president as incompetent and untrustworthy, since promises to end corruption brought him to power. The government worries that its popularity will crumble if the public perceives punishing the culprits as being part of a settling scores campaign. Indeed, the opposition might accuse the government of being vindictive toward its own political opponents. Punishment is not vengeance or retribution when it upholds justice and offers restitution. Nor is it vengeful to prevent the unjust carrying out of public activities, including unlawful attempts to obtain power. Any delay in investigating corruption is unfair even to the accused because they must have an opportunity to clear their names. For the public, any delay would vindicate claims of innocence and provide opportunities for the opposition to regroup. Having enjoyed power and wealth for nearly a decade, and now vulnerable to being brought to justice, the opposition will do its utmost to regain power. A change of political actors does not automatically transform the values of the entire political culture. The considerable influence those accused still command over different layers of the justice system and mass media may be another reason for the delay in bringing people to justice. We must not forget that the charges of corruption are not limited to members of the previous government, but to everyone. Corruption was widely networked and penetrated into every layer of society. All those connected to corruption will try to conceal the truth and sabotage justice. Corruption will persist until the primary culprits are prosecuted. The worry now is that the government will prolong the investigations to placate the public until the next election and scapegoat a few lower-ranking individuals while the primary perpetrators, who occupy higher levels of the political, civil, and private sectors, go free. If this occurs, no one will believe the government’s promise to create a corruption-free culture. This would

58

strengthen the opposition. The government must remember that corruption was the main reason for the landslide victory of the Adam Adami Party over the BJP and the Congress Party in neighboring India. Since many believe the corruption and human rights abuse allegations, the most debilitating consequence of the government’s failure to bring those on the “black list” to justice would be the loss of public faith in the justice system. The public is already suspicious of the justice system, which seems lenient toward select influential politicians and privileged individuals, while being harsher toward others. Would the police department seek the attorney general’s advice before questioning less privileged individuals accused of violating immigration laws and obtaining a diplomatic passport? Why has the government arrested only one senior politician and a few lower level employees of public and private institutions, rather than those occupying higher levels of authority? Why has the government arrested the former head of the Independent Television Network (ITN), but not billionaire business tycoons? Why was the court hearing for a prominent cabinet minister postponed? Why are some people’s passports impounded while under investigation, and others permitted to leave the country, despite public protest? The answers to these hard questions certainly have legal and political implications. If legitimate reasons exist for these inconsistencies, the government needs to share them. The police department’s media spokesperson carefully explains the progress of some cases, yet remains silent on others. People should not know every detail, but the government needs to engage the public in such a way as not to provide ammunition to its critics. The government cannot take for granted that the majority is as concerned as the government about corruption compared to other issues ordinary citizens face. It desperately needs a public relations campaign to educate the public regarding short- and long-term consequences of delaying prosecuting corruption cases and progress on good governance and the future of the justice system. Truth and Accountability The second area of justice involves international and domestic demands for transitional justice, accountability for allegations of human rights abuses and war crimes, and devolution of power. [1] The Tamils do not expect miracles from the Siresena regime in 100 days. Still, the government is in a much stronger position than the previous regime’s, given that the Tamil political parties have expressed their willingness to work with the government and the international community appears to support this government. The onus is on the government to exploit this opportunity and bring closure to the issue so that the country can move onto other equally pressing issues. Once its report is complete, the UNHCR will likely refer it to Sri Lanka’s ‘domestic mechanism for action.’ To ensure good governance and transitional justice for the Tamil community and the country as a whole, the international community must consider the government’s request to carefully time the release of the report due to the rather complex and difficult transition to good governance in which the government is involved. However, the government also needs to answer a number of questions. How does the delay in releasing the UNHCR report help the government set up a domestic mechanism for managing human rights and reconciliation issues? Why are releasing the report and strengthening of the domestic mechanisms posited as contradictory? Would the domestic mechanism as an alternative inquiry into war crimes allegations replace the international inquiry or serve as a mechanism to apply the report’s findings to ensure restorative justice? Answers to these questions will enhance the government’s position regarding the accountability and reconciliation process.

59

Either way, given the complexity of domestic and international politics, a compromise for an inquiry into human rights abuses and war crimes would be a joint committee agreeable to both the government and the Tamil community. Let the committee and the justice system, not the politicians, decide whether the abuses that took place during and after the war constitute war crimes. If the government is opposed to international intervention, it should explain its reasons to the Tamil community, given their reservations about a domestic inquiry as indicated in the resolution passed at the Northern Provincial Council. One might well ask whether a resolution per se creates national disharmony and undermine the government’s attempt to strengthen countries justice system.[2] However, we must try to answer this question in the context in which the resolution was passed before passing any hasty judgments about it. ‘Smart patriots’, even with a slightest semblance of moral integrity, will assess the merits of the Northern Resolution in relation to Tamils community’s loss of faith in the country’s justice system due to its failure to reveal the truth about human rights violations and to bring those responsible to justice. Similar experiences of Sinhalese and other minorities (e.g. abductions, killings, disappearances and deprivations of the due process) reached a deplorable state under the Rajapaksa regime. We also need to empathize with public skepticism over the present government’s ability to expose and silence those who obstruct truth and justice. The current government is a coalition comprised of different political parties known for their different ideological and political positions regarding reconciliation and transitional justice. It has to face a challenging general election in a few months against an opposition that is likely to exploit the government’s responses in this regard. Evidently, today’s governments respond more to international than domestic pressure, despite the questionable motives of those international actors. An International inquiry as it is envisioned would not be inherently partial, since it promises to expose truths about the massacres, abductions, and use of people as human shields by the LTTE, and does not claim to take away the right of the government to ensure the impartiality of the inquiry. If taken with a sense of humility, such an inquiry will have a positive impact on the new government’s efforts to restore the credibility of the domestic justice system, and would help eradicate public doubts about the Sri Lankan government’s commitment to truth and justice. Discovering truth through an impartial inquiry and strengthening the domestic mechanisms of accountability along with truth and restitution differ markedly. In any justice system, truth is non-negotiable and precedes restitution. In most cases, restitutional relevance and proportionality are negotiable. For these important reasons, the government needs to pay as much attention and due consideration to the Tamils’ perspectives regarding the type of inquiry that would be most impartial, as much as to those who oppose such an inquiry. Equally important is to defuse simplistic arguments accusing Tamil political parties and civil society groups calling for an international inquiry of acts of aggression against the Sinhalese. Nor should the government succumb to the claims that the Tamil parties demand for an impartial inquiry is indicative of their refusal to work within a united Sri Lanka or their lack empathy for the difficult transition process with which the government is faced. Such views will only strengthen both extremes of the ethnic divide and cost both the Sinhala and Tamil votes in the next elections. Not only the Tamils but also the Sinhalese continue to pressure the government to conduct impartial inquiries into charges of corruption and human rights abuses! The previous government spent all its efforts to prevent an UN investigation of human rights abuses and did not cooperate with the investigation. None of these efforts prevented the investigation. It is matter of time before the final report is leased. The Present government should not go try to down in history for delaying the release of the report. That would be a waste of time and resources, and in the long run will not help the reconciliation process or improve the relations with the international community. If the Tamils voted for the present government because the

60

previous government’ failed to reveal the truth and ensure accountability, at the next election they could also vote against the government if it delay the UNHCR report until the election is over. If the government is so enthusiastic about revealing the truth about corruption and abuse, then why is it so reluctant to do the same about the human rights abuses concerns of the Tamil community? The government should at least to provide a better explanation to the public for its interest in delaying the report. The UNHCR report will only provide clarity to information already suspected by many, rather than unravel mysterious. Myths and unfounded fears about an impartial inquiry prevent the meeting of public and international demands for accountability. The government should dispel misperceptions and educate the public as to why accountability is a precondition for good governance: to enhance the security forces’ reputation, restore the justice system’s credibility, and even more importantly debunk conspiracy theories about external intervention. The present government cannot pursue the same strategy as the previous government. The purpose of the previous regime’s avoiding an international inquiry was to enhance its public legitimacy by calling such an inquiry a national security threat. This position only safeguarded the regime’s interests. It did not address accountability issues or national security threats, wasted a colossal amount of public funds, and passed the problem onto the present government, along with formidable constraints. The government should focus on the benefits of an impartial inquiry, proving its ability to pursue truth in an unbiased manner. How will truth contribute to transitional justice and good governance? How might that truth be used as a smokescreen to exert undue pressure on Sri Lanka? How will the revelation of truth and subsequent restitution relieve such pressures and place the country on a high moral footing in the world’s eyes? How would Sri Lanka’s commitment to truth and justice contribute to international human rights? What precedent could Sri Lanka set for international human rights? Engagement with the public with these questions engagement would help the government to create the domestic and international conditions needed to ensure accountability and reconciliation. Devolution Transitional justice is non-negotiable and morally desirable, and helps to build trust between the two communities to create the necessary conditions for a long-term political solution to the conflict. The government has already taken a number of steps, including changing the governor, passing a bill to hand over land to the public, and restricting the military’s movements. The government might succeed in implementing the 13th Amendment, but it needs to be attentive to the Tamil community’s reservations. It should demonstrate that it is not simply about administrative decentralization, but actual devolution of power; the two are fundamentally different. Devolution debates mainly focus on perceived threats to the country. Many see devolution as a step toward separation and antithetical to the ‘unitary’ character of the country. Instead, we should focus on two different questions: How would the substantial devolution of power to the northern and eastern regions contribute to the economic and cultural vitality of the regions and the country? Secondly, how would such devolution contribute to good governance and to reduce the concentration of power at the center? The government could demonstrate its commitment to devolution by involving all the communities as equal stakeholders in the dialogue, as opposed to imposing devolution from the top down. The government should not abrogate this responsibility just because it now commands the goodwill of those countries that demand accountability.

61

The foreign minister’s speech in the United States regarding the accountability and reconciliation process is welcome. The speech is far more nuanced than speeches made by his predecessor on similar subjects. At the moment, the foreign minister (and rightly so) is busy abroad negotiating with international actors. But similar enthusiasm is lacking in domestic efforts to counter the opposition’s criticism of these negotiations. This will only add to the legitimacy of the opposition’s claim that the government is secretly collaborating with foreign forces hostile to the country’s national interests. In short, if the present government provides credibility to previous government’s racist slogans and tactics to delay justice, it will runs the risk of losing both Tamil and Sinhala votes at the next general election. This government also risks the majority vote if it permits the opposition to fan the flames of the majority community’s fears of the government’s approach to transitional justice. This would further polarize the country along ethnic lines and cause it to become isolated internationally. The loss of another opportunity to restore public and international faith in the country’s justice system and pave the way for another bunch of crooks to take over governance after next parliamentary election would be devastating. The government needs a public relations campaign to alleviate the Sinhala fear of an impartial inquiry and candidly explain the meaning and necessity of devolution, dispelling myths and allaying fears. It is the government’s duty to create public awareness that critically examines the assumptions underlying these fears and prepare citizens to accept the hard choices the government needs to make to ensure accountability and good governance. Good governance does not mean clinging to power at the expense of truth and justice. Failure to honor demands for transitional justice for minorities is not compatible with the moral integrity of good governance, nor could it be sustainable in the long term. The government must remember that the moral decadence of the Rajapaksa regime caused its downfall, despite its control over the state security apparatus and financial and state resources. Even the war euphoria was insufficient for the government to escape this moral indictment. The morally superior course of action would be to take political risks by punishing those responsible for corruption and addressing the transitional justice concerns of the Tamil community. This would also better position the government to win the next election than abrogating responsibility for political expediency. Coming to terms with truth and justice is an easier way to restore the faith in country’s justice system, and it is inherently uncomfortable and never a risk free process. Such risk might be personal or political (e.g. losing the next election), but that would be a worthwhile price for justice, vouchsafing a victory for society in the long run. This is the lesson learned from the past two centuries’ positive social reforms. ### [1] http://dbsjeyaraj.com/dbsj/archives/37631 [2] http://groundviews.org/2011/08/26/war-crimes-investigations-in-sri-lanka-an-unpopular-view/

62

THE LEGAL CASE OF THE TAMIL GENOCIDE Annex ‘E’ The UNROW Human Rights Impact Litigation Clinic, an impact litigation clinic of American University Washington College of Law, has advocated and litigated on behalf of victims of the armed conflict in Sri Lanka for nearly five years. On September 22, 2010, UNROW released a new report calling for the establishment of a new international tribunal to prosecute those most responsible for the crimes committed during the conflict. In December 2010, UNROW submitted evidence of human rights violations committed during the armed conflict to the United Nations Panel of Experts on Sri Lanka, which U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-Moon appointed in 2010. In September 2011, UNROW filed a lawsuit, Devi v. Silva, on behalf of victims of the armed conflict in Sri Lanka against Shavendra Silva, a former military general who commanded the 58th Division of the Sri Lankan army during the war. Special recognition to Ali A. Beydoun, UNROW Director and Supervisor, and students Diana Damschroder, Amira Mikhail, and Whitney-Ann Mulhauser for their writing and editing of this piece. Introduction

Sri Lanka has been mired in ethnic conflict since it received independence from Great Britain in 1948. After centuries of colonial rule, under which the Tamil and Sinhalese territories were primarily administered separately, political power was distributed to the Sinhalese upon independence. Sri Lanka’s Sinhalese, the dominant ethnicity on the island, immediately began—and indeed have not stopped—manipulating ethno-religious nationalism for political gain at the expense of the Tamil community, which constitutes approximately eighteen percent of the island’s population. Sinhala nationalism was mobilized to disenfranchise and discriminate against the Tamil community. As non-violent Tamil protests were met with state violence and increasing brutality, an armed struggle for a separate Tamil state of Tamil Eelam began. Sri Lanka’s bloody armed conflict ended over five years ago, killing tens of thousands of Tamil civilian men, women, and children. During the conflict, the international community expressed serious concerns regarding the “fate of civilians caught up in the conflict zone during the final stages of the war, the confinement of some 250,000 Tamil refugees to camps for months afterwards, and allegations that the government had ordered the execution of captured or surrendering rebels.”

Despite the war’s end, however, there has been no accountability or justice for the deaths of innocent Tamils. This article will analyze the Sri Lankan government’s violations of international law relating to the crime of genocide, drawing primarily from U.N. reports and other public materials. The article begins by examining the legal definition of genocide and jurisprudence applying and interpreting the definition of genocidal intent. The article then provides a comparative analysis of Srebrenica, an internationally-recognized genocide, with the crisis in Sri Lanka. The article offers an overview of the evidence demonstrating the Sri Lankan government’s genocidal intent against Tamils, and establishes the need for an international investigation into Sri Lanka’s genocide. Legal Definition of Genocide and Jurisprudence Interpreting Genocidal Intent

63

During a campaign to distinguish genocide from other international crimes, international scholar Raphael Lemkin described genocide as a “coordinated plan of different actions aiming at the destruction of essential foundations of the life of national groups, with the aim of annihilating the groups themselves.” In part, as a result of his efforts, the U.N. General Assembly adopted the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of Genocide (Genocide Convention) in 1948. The Genocide Convention, however, sets forth a relatively ambiguous and restrictive definition of genocide—restrictive in that to determine whether genocide has occurred, a body with jurisdiction over the alleged crimes must conclude that the acts were carried out against persons of a particular group and targeted based on such membership, the acts fall under at least one of the five enumerated acts, and the perpetrators committed the crimes with the specific intent to destroy, in whole or in part, the entire group. Sri Lanka acceded to the Genocide Convention in 1950. Article II of the Genocide Convention provides the following definition of genocide: In the present Convention, genocide means any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such: (a) Killing members of the group; (b) Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group; (c) Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part; (d) Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group; (e) Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group. Under Article II, the group must intend to commit the specific “acts”—e.g., killing—as well as the group must possess the requisite genocidal intent, meaning an “intent to destroy, in whole or in part, . . . [the protected] group, as such.” When determining whether a group has committed genocide, genocidal intent is an exceedingly difficult evidentiary hurdle. This element is often referred to as dolus specialis or specific intent. The International Criminal Court’s (ICC) Elements of Crimes states that the “[e]xistence of intent and knowledge can be inferred from relevant facts and circumstances.” The International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY) has held that genocidal intent “may, in the absence of direct explicit evidence, be inferred from” circumstantial evidence. When proving genocidal intent based on an inference, “that inference must be the only reasonable inference available on the evidence.” Noting that genocidal intent will usually be inferred, and therefore will, in most cases, “be proved by circumstantial evidence,” the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda (ICTR) further elaborated that: the specific intent of genocide may be inferred from certain facts or indicia, including but not limited to (a) the general context of the perpetration of other culpable acts systematically directed against that same group, whether these acts were committed by the same offender or by others, (b) the scale of atrocities committed, (c) their general nature, (d) their execution in a region or a country, (e) the fact that the victims were deliberately and systematically chosen on account of their membership of a particular group, (f) the exclusion, in this regard, of members of other groups, (g) the political doctrine which gave rise to the acts referred to, (h) the repetition of destructive and discriminatory acts and (i) the perpetration of acts

64

which violate the very foundation of the group or considered as such by their perpetrators.

Persecution has not historically been clearly defined under international instruments until the Rome Statute of the ICC. ICTY jurisprudence clarified that the crime against humanity of persecution “consists of an act or omission, which (1) discriminates in fact and which denies or infringes upon fundamental rights as provided in international customary or treaty law and (2) was carried out deliberately with the intention to discriminate on political, racial or religious grounds.” The Rome Statute defines persecution as the “intentional and severe deprivation of fundamental rights contrary to international law by reason of the identity of the group or collectivity.” International criminal law scholar M. Cherif Bassiouni provided the following composite definition of persecution: State policy leading to the infliction upon an individual of harassment, torment, oppression, or discriminatory measures, designed to or likely to produce physical or mental suffering or economic harm, because of the victim’s beliefs, views, or membership in a given identifiable group (religious, social, ethnic, linguistic, etc.), or simply because the perpetrator sought to single out a given category of victims for reasons peculiar to the perpetrator.

For persecution to amount to a crime against humanity, it must be “part of a widespread or systematic attack directed against any civilian population.”

Although persecution is typically contrasted with genocide due to the heightened mens rea burden for genocide, international tribunals have concluded that the crime against humanity of persecution, when committed with the intent to destroy, in whole or in part, an ethnic group, may constitute genocide. The ICTY has noted that “[f]rom the viewpoint of mens rea, genocide is an extreme and most inhuman form of persecution. When persecution escalates to the extreme form of willful and deliberate acts designed to destroy a group or part of a group, it can be held that such persecution amounts to genocide.”

In addition to the following analysis comparing the genocide committed in Srebrenica to Sri Lanka, there is also support to conclude that an extreme and inhuman form of persecution against the Sri Lankan Tamils occurred, amounting to genocide. A U.N. Panel of Experts appointed by Secretary-General Ban Ki Moon found evidence that the Sri Lankan government’s “campaign constituted persecution of the population of the Vanni.” Further, the Panel concluded that there was sufficient evidence to “support a finding of the crime against humanity of persecution insofar as the other acts listed here appear to have been committed on racial or political grounds against the Tamil population of the Vanni, which was perceived by the Government as supporting the LTTE.” As demonstrated below, the Sri Lankan government committed its destructive acts with the intent to destroy the Vanni Tamils as a group and therefore the government’s persecution of the group constitutes genocide. Inferring Genocidal Intent in Srebrenica and Sri Lanka

Several parallels can be drawn between the situation in Sri Lanka and other situations where international courts inferred genocide. This section analyzes the case study of Srebrenica to demonstrate that the Sri Lankan government’s persecution of the Tamils rose to the extreme level of willful and deliberate acts designed to destroy the Vanni Tamils, and thus constitutes genocide.

65

Srebrenica Genocide In 1993, Srebrenica, a town in Bosnia and Herzegovina, was declared a United Nations safe area, specifically designed to protect civilians from the Bosnian war. However, in 1995, between 7,000 and 8,000 Bosniak (Bosnian Muslim) men were systematically killed in this area. Further, Bosniak women, children, and elderly people were forcibly removed from the enclave and transferred to other areas of Muslim-controlled Bosnia. Only a year after the devastating events of Srebrenica, the ICTY concluded that the perpetrators intended to destroy the Bosniaks in the area. The ICTY found Radislav Krstić, a General-Major in the Bosnian Serb Army (VRS) and Commander of the Drina Corps, guilty of aiding and abetting genocide and the crime against humanity of persecution, among other crimes. The ICTY held that “[t]he intent requirement of genocide under Article 4 of the [ICTY] Statute is therefore satisfied where evidence shows that the alleged perpetrator intended to destroy at least a substantial part of the protected group.” Further, the ICTY noted that “[i]f a specific part of the group is emblematic of the overall group, or is essential to its survival, that may support a finding that the part qualifies as substantial within the meaning of Article 4.”

The Trial Chamber also concluded that certain acts, which are not physically destructive of a life—e.g., forcible transfer to other areas—do not disrupt a finding that the perpetrator possessed the requisite intent to destroy the protected group. The Appeals Chamber agreed with the Trial Chamber that the perpetrators “knew that their activities would inevitably result in the physical disappearance of the Bosnian Muslim population at Srebrenica.” Although forcible transfer “does not constitute in and of itself a genocidal act,” the Trial Chamber may rely on the act as “evidence of the intentions” of the perpetrators. “The genocidal intent may be inferred, among other facts, from evidence of ‘other culpable acts systematically directed against the same group.’”

The Sri Lankan government’s deliberate and willful acts against Tamils are analogous to those committed in Srebrenica. The Sri Lankan government “deliberately used greatly reduced estimates [of the civilian population size], as part of a strategy to limit the supplies going into the Vanni, thereby putting ever-greater pressure on the civilian population.” The Sri Lankan government claimed that 70,000 Tamils were trapped in the conflict zone, an area the size of New York City’s Central Park, while the Red Cross estimated 250,000 people remained in the area. The government intentionally understated the population size in order to hide the total deaths that occurred and to starve the remaining population into submission. During the government’s 2008-2009 military offensive in the Vanni region, the Sri Lankan forces indiscriminately shelled, bombed, and fired guns in the No Fire Zone, killing up to 70,000 Tamil civilians in the final months of the war. As Tamils fled the war zone in early 2009, they were detained in IDP camps that Human Rights Watch said were little better than prisons. In February 2009, the Sri Lankan government released its plan to keep Tamil refugees in five IDP camps for up to three years. The government wanted to construct 39,000 semi-permanent homes, as well as post offices and banks, in these “welfare villages” where refugees were forcibly detained. Like the Bosnian Serb forces’ plan to physically disappear the Bosnian Muslims from Srebrenica, this plan would similarly physically extinguish the Tamils from ever reconstituting their communities in Vanni.

66

The following chart further outlines the similarities between the two conflicts with respect to proving the elements of the international crime of genocide.

67

Sri Lanka’s Genocide Sri Lankan government officials’ statements and actions provide sufficient evidence to show that there are reasonable grounds to believe that government officials acted with the specific intent to destroy the Tamils in Vanni. This evidence has been outlined below. Government Strategy to Deny and Conceal the Crimes Committed Against Tamils Evidence has emerged that the Sri Lankan government is attempting to conceal the crimes committed in the Vanni, with Army personnel “deliberately and systematically” seeking to exhume and destroy mass graves. The Public Interest Advocacy Center (PIAC), an Australian-based human rights group, issued an in-depth report regarding crimes allegedly committed by the Sri Lankan government and the LTTE during the war. PIAC obtained eyewitness information regarding the “systematic destruction of civilian mass burial sites in the post-conflict period.” In the report, PIAC reports that: According to this witness, these burial sites contained human remains from hundreds, and in some instances, thousands of men, women and children who died during the conflict. The precise location of these, and other, burial sites, has been provided to ICEP. This witness has alleged that scores of civilian mass burial sites were systematically destroyed after the conflict. According to this witness, the SFs [Security Forces], and specifically members of the Sri Lankan Police and Sri Lankan Army, are directly implicated in this conduct. This witness believes that senior SFs officials knew that graves were being identified for the purpose of exhumation, and permanent destruction, over a period of more than a year.

This account corroborates a Sri Lankan soldier’s memory of the government bulldozing mass graves. The former soldier reported to Channel 4, a British news outlet, that: Massive numbers of children, women and men were killed in the final stages of the war. When I say massive, in Puthumathalan alone, over 1500 civilians were killed. But they couldn’t bury all of them. What they did was, they bought a bulldozer, they spread the dead bodies out and put sand on top of them, making it look like a bund. . . . They wanted to clear them [the dead bodies] that’s why they brought that big vehicle. All they could do was just put sand on them. In some areas you couldn’t go because there was such a terrible smell of decomposing bodies. They were just innocent Tamil civilians and did not belong to either warring party.

Additionally, the Sri Lankan government waited nearly two years to admit that any civilian casualties occurred during the final months of the war. Prior to this admission, the government repeatedly alleged that there were no civilian casualties during the war.

Government Officials’ Statements Reflect Genocidal Intent The following official statements made by high-ranking Sri Lankan officials provide a strong basis for inferring genocidal intent. They depict the anti-Tamil hostility underpinning Sinhala Buddhist chauvinism, which has long been a hallmark feature of Sri Lanka’s ethno-nationalist politics. The government’s construct of Sri Lanka is based on the primacy of the Sinhala identity, which fundamentally excludes Tamils. The extermination of

68

Tamils— particularly Vanni Tamils, who were considered the most ardent Tamil nationalists, and therefore most resistant to the Sinhalization of the Sri Lankan identity—facilitated the realization of the government’s ideal Sri Lankan state. President Rajapaksa’s following statement captures the exclusionary nature of the Sri Lankan identity. The Tamil identity is no longer recognized—it has been subsumed into the Sinhala “Sri Lankan” identity. We have removed the word minorities from our vocabulary three years ago. No longer are the Tamils, Muslims, Burghers, Malays and any others minorities. There are only two peoples in this country. One is the people that love this country. The other comprises the small groups that have no love for the land of their birth. Those who do not love the country are now a lesser group. – President Mahinda Rajapaksa (2005–present) during the ceremonial opening of the Sri Lankan Parliament on May 19, 2009, cited in The Sunday Leader, May 24, 2009. Defense Secretary Gotabhaya Rajapaksa’s following statement reflects his belief that all persons under attack by the Sri Lankan military were legitimate targets. He reveals his view that every individual who stayed in LTTE-controlled territory was an LTTE sympathizer, and was therefore no longer an “independent observer” or a civilian. His statement further shows that ideological support for the LTTE alone was sufficient cause for death. There are no independent observers, only LTTE sympathizers. Radio announcements were made and movement of civilians started a month and a half ago. – Defense Secretary Gotabhaya Rajapaksa (2005–present) in an interview to IBN on February 3, 2009 General Sarath Fonseka’s following statement demonstrates the entitlement Sinhalese feel over the island, and the false benevolence with which the Sinhalese will allow Tamils to live there. I strongly believe that this country belongs to the Sinhalese but there are minority communities and we treat them like our people. . . . We being the majority of the country, 75%, we will never give in and we have the right to protect this country. . . . They can live in this country with us. But they must not try to, under the pretext of being a minority, demand undue things. – General Sarath Fonseka, the Commander of the Sri Lanka Army (December 2005–July 2009) cited in the National Post, September 23, 2008 There are also several historical statements from key Sri Lankan leaders that evince an intent to destroy the Tamil people. Former President J.R. Jayawardane’s following statement reflects the zero-sum mentality of successive Sri Lankan governments with respect to the Tamil people. He is conveying the sentiment that the Sinhalese are happier and more secure on an island without Tamils. He is also alluding to the government’s oft-utilized strategy of depriving Tamils of food and humanitarian aid, seen in the embargos against the North-East throughout the decades of conflict, and, of course, during the 2008-2009 offensive.

69

I am not worried about the opinion of the Tamil people . . . now we cannot think of them, not about their lives or their opinion . . . the more you put pressure in the north, the happier the Sinhala people will be here . . . . Really if I starve the Tamils out, the Sinhala people will be happy. – President J.R. Jayawardane (1977–1988), cited in Daily Telegraph, July 11, 1983. Government-sponsored colonization schemes have worked to alter traditional demographics on the island. Tamils habiting the contiguous Northern and Eastern provinces presented the gravest threat to the unity of the Sri Lankan state, so within years of receiving independence, the Sinhala government attempted to suppress this threat by financing land grabs in the East. Since independence, the population of Tamils in the Eastern Province decreased by ten percent while the Sinhalese population increased by fifteen percent.

Today you are brought here and given a plot of land. You have been uprooted from your village. You are like a piece of driftwood in the ocean; but remember that one day the whole country will look up to you. The final battle for the Sinhala people will be fought on the plains of Padaviya. You are men and women who will carry this island’s destiny on your shoulders. Those who are attempting to divide this country will have to reckon with you. The country may forget you for a few years, but one day very soon they will look up to you as the last bastion of the Sinhala. – The first Prime Minister D.S. Senanayake (1947–1952), addressing Sinhala colonists being settled in the traditionally Tamil Eastern Province in the early days of Ceylon’s independence. Padaviya is in the district of Anurathapuram, located on the border between the traditionally Tamil region and the Sinhala region in the south of Sri Lanka. These historical statements provide the contextual background to the atrocities of 2009, and help explain the willful silence and complicity of the Sinhala public in whitewashing these crimes after 2009. Nature and Extent of the Violence Committed by Government Forces Against Tamils According to a U.N. Internal Review Report, up to 70,000 Tamil civilians were killed in the final months of the war. Mass graves continue to be unearthed throughout North-East Sri Lanka. In January, a grave with an estimated thirty-one bodies, many of whom were women and children, was found in a Tamil area near the location of the final stages of the war. These bodies are presumably among the thousands of civilians executed and covered up by Sri Lankan security forces. The nature and extent of Sri Lanka’s violence against Tamils will be explored in greater depth in Section II below. Control of the State According to recent reports, the Rajapaksa family has a total of twenty-nine family and extended family members filling high-level civil service and industry positions, and the family controls between forty-five and seventy percent of the national budget. President Rajapaksa’s brother, Gotabaya, was appointed Defense Secretary in 2005 upon the President’s election. He held office throughout and beyond the final months of Sri Lanka’s armed conflict. In 2011, two Sri Lankan Army soldiers testified that Gotabaya Rajapaksa crafted the strategy for the final assault on the LTTE that resulted in

70

thousands of Tamil civilian deaths. The testimony, coupled with circumstantial evidence, indicate high-level control of military resources as well as decisions that knowingly led to Tamil civilian casualties. Another brother, Basil Rajapaksa, is both Minister for Economic Development and the head of the “President’s Task Force,” a body appointed to rebuild the North, and coordinate the security forces in rehabilitation, resettlement, and development. These three Rajapaksa brothers control five of the largest government ministries. Chamal Rajapaksa, another brother, is the speaker of the Sri Lankan parliament. Additionally, Upul Dissanayaka—a member of Mahinda Rajapaksa’s extended family—manages one of the largest news publishers, The Associated Newspapers of Ceylon.

Sri Lankan Government’s Campaign Against Tamils Constitutes Genocide

Extensive evidence is available that satisfies four of the five enumerated genocidal acts in the Genocide Convention: (1) killing members of the group; (2) causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group; (3) deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part; and (4) imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group. This section is not exhaustive of all the evidence available that supports the legal conclusions set forth herein. Killing Members of the Group According to the U.N. Report of the Secretary-General’s Panel of Experts on Accountability in Sri Lanka, the Sri Lankan government: [S]helled on a large scale in three consecutive No Fire Zones, where it had encouraged the civilian population to concentrate, even after indicating that it would cease the use of heavy weapons. It shelled the United Nations hub, food distribution lines and near the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) ships that were coming to pick up the wounded and their relatives from the beaches. It shelled in spite of its knowledge of the impact, provided by its own intelligence systems and through notification by the United Nations, the ICRC and others. Most civilian casualties in the final phases of the war were caused by Government shelling. At the end of January 2009, government forces were killing approximately thirty-three Tamil people each day, with these casualties increasing to 116 people per day by April 2009. This toll surged, “with an average of 1,000 civilians killed each day until May 19, 2009.” The U.N. Panel of Experts reported on an elite unit within the Special Task Force (STF) of the police that was directly under the command of Defense Secretary Gotabaya Rajapaksa. The Experts found that the unit was implicated in organizing “white van” operations in which individuals were abducted, tortured, and often “disappeared.” President Mahinda Rajapaksa publicly stated that the Army strategically and intentionally cornered Tamils. According to the President, “[t]hese were not areas demarcated by the U.N. or somebody else; they were demarcated by our armed forces. The whole thing was planned by our forces to corner them. The Army was advancing from North to South, South to North, on all sides. So I would say they got cornered by our strategies.” Further, Callum Macrae, director of award-winning documentaries about Sri Lanka with UK’s Channel 4, corroborated the President’s statements, finding “evidence that the attacks killing civilians were accurately targeted.” In addition to deliberate shelling of civilians, systematic executions demonstrate intent to kill Tamils.

71

Callum Macrae also reported that evidence exists “depicting the systematic and cold-blooded execution of bound, naked prisoners—and which also suggests sexual assault of naked female fighters.” At least 200 deceased and mutilated bodies, primarily of Tamil women and young girls, were observed by the employee of an international agency at the mortuary of a government hospital in February and March 2009. As reported to the International Crimes Evidence Project, “many of the bodies of the women were naked and bore physical evidence of rape and sexual mutilation, with knife wounds in the nature of long slashes, bite marks or deep scratches on the breasts, and vaginal mutilation by knives, bottles and sticks . . . . The bodies also typically bore signs of gunshot wounds to the forehead, which appeared to have been inflicted at close range due to the lack of peripheral damage.”

Causing Serious Bodily or Mental Harm to Members of the Group The U.N. Report of the Secretary-General’s Panel of Experts on Accountability in Sri Lanka found credible allegations that security forces committed rape and sexual violence against Tamil civilians while screening those leaving areas of conflict and in IDP camps.

Yasmin Sooka, one of the experts who contributed to the Secretary-General’s U.N. report, released her own report in March 2014, concluding that “[a]bduction, arbitrary detention, torture, rape and sexual violence have increased in the post-war period . . . . These widespread and systematic violations by the Sri Lankan security forces occur in a manner that indicates a coordinated, systematic plan approved by the highest levels of government.” The report found “a pattern of targeting Tamils for abduction and arbitrary detention unconnected to a lawful purpose, involving widespread acts of torture and rape.” This report was based on forty sworn statements from witnesses who testified regarding their experiences of abduction, torture, and sexual violence by Sri Lankan security forces between May 2009 and February 2014. The report “paints a chilling picture of the continuation of the conflict against the ethnic Tamil Community with the purpose of sowing terror and destabilising community members who remain in the country.” The report identified “a practice of rape and sexual violence that has become institutionalized and entrenched in the Sri Lankan security forces.” Survivors reported being raped by uniformed male officers from the Sri Lankan military. A witness recounted a disturbing interaction with an officer who told her, “you Tamil, you slave, if we make you pregnant we will make you abort . . . you are Tamil we will rape you like this, this is how you will be treated, even after an abortion you will be raped again.” A Human Rights Watch report released in February 2013 also documented seventy-five cases of politically motivated sexual assaults of primarily Tamil detainees. Human Rights Watch found “disturbing patterns, strongly suggesting that [sexual violence] was a widespread and systematic practice,” and concluded that rape was a key element of more wide-ranging torture “intended to . . . instill terror in individuals and the broader Tamil population.” The report stated that “[s]exual violence, as with other serious abuses committed by Sri Lankan security forces, was committed against a backdrop of deeply entrenched impunity.”

Further, systematic attacks on hospitals during the 2009 military campaign caused serious bodily and mental harm to Tamils. Human Rights Watch documented at least thirty such attacks on permanent and makeshift hospitals in the combat area after December 2008. Gotabaya Rajapaksa, Sri Lanka’s Defense Secretary, told Sky News that any hospital that was not within the unilaterally declared “no fire zone” set up by the government was a legitimate target.

72

The destructive campaign has caused permanent mental effects on those who survived. Investigators with the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF), and Sri Lanka Ministry of Healthcare and Nutrition conducted a health survey of Jaffna District residents between July and September 2009. They found that the “prevalence of PTSD (13%), anxiety (48.5%), and depression (41.8%) symptoms among currently displaced Jaffna residents is more comparable with post-war Kosovars and Afghans.” As noted by the Permanent Peoples’ Tribunal on Sri Lanka, “continuous displacement and endless trauma caused by protracted war had a devastating impact” on mental health among Tamils. Further, the government continues to impose restrictions on psychosocial support services in Tamil areas, which further exacerbates serious mental harm. Deliberately Inflicting on the Group Conditions of Life Calculated to Bring About its Physical Destruction in Whole or in Part A military blockade against Tamil areas has been in place since 1990, except for ceasefire periods, which has contributed to the historical impoverishment and isolation of the Tamil community. The blockade has prevented ordinary items such as cement, gasoline, candles, and chocolate from entering Tamil areas. During the certain periods of the ethnic conflict, the military adopted a harsher stance, and blocked all humanitarian aid intended for civilians. The U.N. Panel of Experts Report found that the government deliberately understated the Tamil population size “as part of a strategy to limit the supplies going into the Vanni.” The Panel of Experts Report continued, noting that “[a] senior Government official subsequently admitted that the estimates were reduced to this end. The low numbers also indicate that the Government conflated civilians with LTTE in the final stages of the war.” According to the International Crimes Evidence Project, the government’s refusal of “adequate food and medical supplies into the Vanni despite being aware of the devastating effect it would have on civilians, … could have amounted to inhumane acts or persecution, or both.” Such intentional starvation demonstrates the government’s deliberate infliction of deadly conditions calculated to bring about the physical destruction of Tamils. Callum Macrae also found evidence of “the deliberate denial of adequate humanitarian supplies of food and medicine to civilians trapped in those grotesquely misnamed No Fire Zones. To justify this policy, the government systematically underestimated the number of civilians trapped in the zones. At the end of April 2009, for example, President Rajapaksa told CNN that ‘there are only about 5,000 . . . even 10,000’ civilians left in the zones.” According to accurate U.N. figures, however, more than 125,000 civilians were stuck in these zones. President Rajapaksa endorsed the inaccurate figures as a means to “justify what almost certainly constitutes a war crime—a crime that left thousands of civilians catastrophically short of food and water—and allowed hundreds to die unnecessarily in makeshift hospitals because of desperate shortages of supplies including blood and anesthetics.” Amnesty International’s Asia director, Sam Zafiri, reportedly stated that the Sri Lankan government’s policy of obstructing aid was deliberate and illegal, noting that “[i]nternational law bans medieval sieges—you can’t subject a population to hunger, famine or plague as a means of military victory.” Today, the Tamil community “shows clear signs of continuing deterioration in terms of health, food and social security.” In the North-East areas, the malnutrition level has reached fifty percent, “corresponding also with the alarming poverty rate measured at [fifty-eight percent]” in those regions. The systematic expulsion of victims from their homes is another means of inflicting conditions of life calculated to bring about the physical destruction of a group, as stated by the International Criminal Tribunals. The Sri Lankan government used this practice extensively against the Tamils, confiscating the Tamils’ private land. In May 2013, 1,474 northern Tamils filed a petition against the government’s confiscation of their land,

73

stating that 6,381 acres were appropriated to build another Army base in Jaffna. The majority of these individuals were refused permission to return to their lands and forced to remain in the “welfare villages,” which enabled the government to claim that the owners of these lands are “unidentifiable.”

Even five years after the end of the war, Sri Lanka announced a defense budget of $1.95 billion for 2014 (twelve percent of the overall 2014 state budget). The Sri Lankan military’s current reach includes police powers throughout the country, with search and detention authority. In Tamil-speaking areas, the Sri Lankan military is “increasing its economic role, controlling land and seemingly establishing itself as a permanent, occupying presence.” The heavy militarization of the North-East areas has led to the drastic increase in Sinhalese settlers, land grabs, construction of Buddhist temples, conversion of village names and street signs from Tamil to Sinhalese, and unrestricted Sinhalese enterprise, all of which threaten to permanently alter the local demography and exacerbate ethnic tensions, as noted by the International Crisis Group. Evidence related to the “escalation of militarisation, colonisation and forcible imposition of Sinhala Buddhist culture in the Eelam Tamil areas” contributed to a finding of genocide by the Peoples’ Tribunal on Sri Lanka.

Imposing Measures Intended to Prevent Births within the Group Doctors aligned with the Sri Lankan government performed unconsented abortions on Tamil women. In May 2007, a confidential cable from the United States Embassy in Colombo stated, “Father Bernard also told us of an EPDP [Eelam People’s Democratic Party, a pro-government paramilitary organization] medical doctor named Dr. Sinnathambi, who performs forced abortions, often under the guise of a regular check-up, on Tamil women suspected of being aligned with the LTTE.”

Further, in August 2013, government health workers forced mothers to accept surgically implanted birth control in the Tamil villages of Veravil, Keranchi, and Valaipaddu in Kilinochchi in the Northern Province. When the women objected, the nurses said that if they did not agree to the contraceptive, they could be denied treatment at the hospital in the future. A Ministry of Health Department report from the Northern Province in 2012 found an unjustifiably higher rate of birth control implants—thirty times higher—in Tamil women in Mullaitivu, compared to the much more densely populated Jaffna. According to the Home for Human Rights (HHR), an organization of lawyers devoted to protecting the fundamental rights of those living in Sri Lanka, more than eighty percent of Tamil women in central Sri Lanka were offered a lump sum payment in return for their ability to reproduce. After receiving this payment—typically 500 rupees—women underwent surgical sterilization. This amount of money is significant, especially for these who are predominantly plantation workers. The population of this Tamil group has dropped annually since 1996 by five percent, whereas the population of the country overall has grown by fourteen percent. In contrast, police and Army officers have been encouraged to have a third child through payment of 100,000 rupees from the government. The police and Army are overwhelmingly Sinhalese, and thus those taking advantage of this offer are Sinhalese. “This systematic pattern of authority-sanctioned coerced sterilizations may amount to an intentional destruction . . . of the Tamil estate population,” as noted by the Home for Human Rights.

Conclusion

The Preamble to the Rome Statute provides that one of the core goals of the Statute is to end impunity for the perpetrators of the most serious crimes

74

of concern to the international community as a whole, which “must not go unpunished.” The post-war situation in Sri Lanka cannot be called ‘post-conflict,’ as it reflects a deteriorating human rights situation with rampant government abuses. The very purpose of the Genocide Convention and later efforts after the Rwandan Genocide, are under threat so long as the international community fails to hold the perpetrators accountable for the bloody armed conflict in Sri Lanka. Impunity will inevitably breed further injustice, which has been demonstrated by recent assaults to the remaining Tamil population. Members of the international community have acknowledged that genocide took place in Sri Lanka and several have called for an independent investigation. Government officials from Australia, Canada, the United Kingdom, and India, as well as Tamil MPs in Sri Lanka have requested an investigation into Sri Lanka’s genocide. International human rights advocates and organizations have similarly called for such an investigation. The obligation to prevent and punish genocide under the Genocide Convention is not a matter of political choice or calculation, but one of binding customary international law. The Office of the High Commission on Human Rights’ Investigation on Sri Lanka (OSIL) should investigate and report on the charge of genocide in its submission to the UN Human Rights Council in March 2015. The UN Security Council should refer the situation in Sri Lanka to the International Criminal Court for prosecutions based on war crimes, crimes against humanity, and genocide. Alternatively or concurrently, domestic courts in countries that may exercise universal jurisdiction over the alleged events and perpetrators, including but not limited to the United States, should prosecute these crimes. Top Sri Lankan officials, starting with President Mahinda Rajapaksa and Defense Secretary Gotabaya Rajapaksa, must be brought to justice. STRATEGIC PLAN TO REACH OUT TO WIN ‘HEARTS & MINDS’ OF TAMIL DIASPORA AND THE TAMIL YOUTH Annex ‘F’ TAMILS SQUEEZED OUT OF HIGHER EDUCATION – 1971:

"Everyone has the right to education... higher education shall be equally accessible to all on the basis of merit" - Article 26.1 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights

"In 1971, a system of standardisation of marks was introduced for admissions to the universities, obviously directed against Tamil-medium students (referred to earlier). K.M. de Silva describes it as follows:

'The qualifying mark for admission to the medical faculties was 250 (out of 400) for Tamil students, whereas it was only 229 for the Sinhalese. Worse still, this same pattern of a lower qualifying mark applied even when Sinhalese and Tamil students sat for the examination in English. In short, students sitting for examinations in the same language, but belonging to two ethnic groups, had different qualifying marks.'

He observes that by doing this in such an obviously discriminatory way, 'the United Front Government of the 1970s caused enormous harm to ethnic relations.'

75

This was not the end; in 1972 the 'district quota system' was introduced, again to the detriment of the Ceylon Tamils. The (Sinhalese) historian C.R. de Silva wrote:

'By 1977 the issue of university admissions had become a focal point of the conflict between the government and Tamil leaders. Tamil youth, embittered by what they considered discrimination against them, formed the radical wing of the Tamil United Liberation Front. Many advocated the use of violence to establish a separate Tamil state of Eelam. It was an object lesson of how inept policy measures and insensitivity to minority interests can exacerbate ethnic tensions .'

(A.Jayaratnam Wilson, The Break up of Sri Lanka, C.Hurst & Company, London, Orient Longman Limited, 1988)

"...Nothing aroused deeper despair among Tamils than the feeling that they are being systematically squeezed out of higher education. They have complained particularly of the system of 'standardisation' in force after 1972, in which marks obtained by candidates for university admission are weighted by giving advantage to certain linguistic groups and/or certain districts..." - Walter Schwarz: Tamils of Sri Lanka - Minority Rights Group Report, 1983

"The Government should re examine its policies on university admissions with a view to basing admission on merit rather than on racial grounds. Tamil and Sinhalese young people alike will then have equal rights to university education on the basis of capacity rather than on race. One of the major points of tension among many Tamil youth has been the implicit racial quota under present university admission policies which has barred many competent youths from pursuing higher education." - Virginia Leary: Ethnic Conflict and Violence in Sri Lanka - Report of a Mission to Sri Lanka on behalf of the International Commission of Jurists, July/August 1981.

http://tamilnation.co/indictment/indict010.htm

An insight into LTTE-administered schools in Europe – the radicalization of Tamil youth:

The Concept and Beginning of the "Thamilcholai" School System

76

Examining the beginnings of the 'Thamilcholai' school system, it is clear that it was designed and created by the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE) terrorist movement, initially within Sri Lanka. The beginnings of this school system can be seen as beginning as an orphanage in and around the year 1990 in accordance with the wishes of the LTTE leader, Velupillai Prabakaran. This orphanage was established with 90 children aged between 2-12 years. In the years 1991 and 1993 the LTTE established two orphanages namely 'Sencholai' for female orphans and 'Kantharuban Aravichollai ' for male orphans (Kantharuban was the name of the first LTTE "sea tiger" suicide cadre who took part in a suicide operation to destroy the Sri Lanka Navy ship "Edithra", in 1990). These orphanages were controlled and administered by the LTTE but to the outside world they were presented as orphanages run by an independent social welfare group.

The first school as such came into being as far back as 1995, long before allegations were levelled against madrasas, for similar alleged ties to terrorist organisations. The establishment of the "Thamailchollai" was ostensibly with the primary purpose of teaching Tamil language and culture to Diaspora children. This was an understandable motive, as in the alien environment of their adopted lands it is important that Tamil cultural values were kept and passed on from generation to generation. The reality is that they are very closely associated with the LTTE. In Europe alone there are more than 350 Thamilchollai schools with approximately 20,000 Tamil students between the ages 4 to 21. The LTTE front organizations are using most of these students not only to promote LTTE interest overseas but also as a source of income. The details of some of the schools that are functioning in Europe are given below;

COUNTRY NO. OF SCHOOLS

NO. OF STUDENTS (APPRX)

FEE CHARGED (EACH SUBJECT)

OVERALL IN CHARGE

ADMINISTER-ED BY LTTE/PRO LTTE ORGS

INDEPENDENTLY OPERATED

GERMANY 145 6500 8 to 25 Euros R.Nagalingam 134 11

SWITZERLAND 133 5800 35 to 45 CHF Mahendran 5800 09

FRANCE 52 5000 8 to 25 Euros 46 07

THE NETHERLANDS

25 600 12 to 25 Euros Ramachandran 21 65

DENMARK 65 1100 60 to 90 DK Arulanandam 62 03

Tamil Schools functioning under different names in Europe

MK - Post Box 65, 7400 Herning, DENMARK TB e.V. - Bessemerstrasse 7c, 7035 Stuttgart, GERMANY TAMOULCHOLAI - 28 Place de La Chappelle, FRANCE TKN - Gruttolaan 45, 1742 BN Schagen, HOLLAND TKN - Via Remo Sandron No 49, 90100 Palermo, ITALY

77

TKN - Via Sturla 60/4, 16131 Genova, ITALY APTK - Nedre Rommen 3, 0988 Oslo, NORWAY TKK - 95, Mill farm Cresent, Hounslow, Midlesex, TW4 5PJ, UK TKN - 4 Denny avenue, Mt Roskil, Auck land, NEWZEALAND ANNAIPOOPATHY - Matastie 5h 171, 00770 Helsinki, FINLAND TAMILCHOLAI - Lakmanlekares Vag 51, 5tr 14558 Norsborg, SWEDEN TKN - Beversesteenweg 3/1, 8800 Roeselare, BELGIUM

Systematic Radicalization of Tamil Youth

It is very interesting to note that while they remain one of the main components of the Tamil Diaspora the true purpose of establishment and functioning of the 'Thamilcholai' Schools has gone unnoticed. Within the 'Thamilcholai' School system it can be seen that political indoctrination began as far back as 1995 with the object of systematically fostering hatred for and supporting violence against the Sinhalese not only in Sri Lanka but throughout the world. The curriculum; while following the Sri Lanka Government Ministry of Education standards and examinations, has been carefully adapted to include a distorted version of the history of Sri Lanka, the concept of Eelam and greater Eelam. Classes were added on Tamil Eelam nationalistic beliefs, and the ideals of martyrdom. Furthermore, the cult and exploits of suicide bombers were exaggerated and glorified. Other barbaric acts of terrorism was praised and admired as heroic acts. All this contributed to the subtle brainwashing of these innocent orphans, and the planting of the seeds of Tamil nationalism, violence and Tamil Eelam.

It is evident that systematic psychological conditioning of students to become martyrs and terrorists started with the LTTE long before it manifested

itself in Islamist madrasas. Please see the images released by Dutch National Police Service Agency (KLPD) with regard to how Tamil children of these

schools are being brainwashed to meet and promote LTTE interest overseas. http://www.chron.com/news/article/APNewsBreak-Tamil-Tigers-still-

active-in-Europe-2218181.php#photo-1669363

Military Training for selected Tamil youth in Europe

There is increasing intelligence insight into, and information regarding, the modus operandi of the over 350 LTTE-backed Tamil Schools spread across Europe. It has now become evident that most of these schools are either directly or indirectly administered by LTTE and have been so for a prolonged period of time with the objective of influencing and ensuring the continuous support of Tamil youth residing in Europe. It has been established that the LTTE has not only used these schools to promote LTTE interest and ideology among young people in the Diaspora but also in certain countries the administrators of the schools also made arrangements to send selected batches of young Tamils to undergo military training in LTTE-controlled parts of Sri Lanka, notably within the Wanni, during the period between 2004 - 2007. Some of these youth, who entered Sri Lanka under the pretext of visiting their relatives, engaged in terrorist operations against Sri Lankan Security Forces and civilians until May 2009, whilst some returned to their respective countries and continue to work in pursuance of terrorist objectives in the fields of fundraising, propaganda and procurement. Sri Lankan Security Forces have recovered considerable documentary evidences with regard to young Tamils and their training with LTTE. Below are three photographs of young Tamils who underwent training programmes organized by LTTE in the Wanni.

78

Threats and Challenges ahead

In the aftermath of the defeat of the LTTE, the functioning of these LTTE-controlled schools have become ever more important to the terrorist movement. Having lost its leadership and with its organisation being dismantled within Sri Lanka, the Thamilchollai schools have become but a means to an end, namely to retain the support for the LTTE and to keep the Tamil separatist cause alive internationally. This is clearly evident as the LTTE front organizations continue to exploit the innocence of the students within these schools by glorifying violence, martyrdom and by propagating propaganda hostile to the Sri Lankan government and its reconciliation and reconstruction programme and by continuing to advocate separatism. In short, the deliberate germination and cultivation of extremism. The irony is that these children and youth will grow up to be citizens of their adopted nations - 'the developed countries' and it is very unlikely that these children/youth will go back to a third world country looking for greener pastures. They will instead practice their extremist ideals in all spheres of their social lives in the very land that gave them refuge. To this end, the growth of Tamil militancy, in the form of underworld gangs in Europe with experience in arms procurement, drug and human trafficking, could be said to be only the "tip of the iceberg" of what is to come in the future, the mutating residue of a third world terrorist movement in the first world. Further, as the curriculum practiced in these schools are not subject to any scrutiny by local authorities, these children are manipulated into serving LTTE propaganda needs by conduct or gestures, writing and by displaying violence and prejudice towards the Sinhala community. The plays and musical events conducted by pro-LTTE front organizations with the children of Thamilcholai schools in all their protest campaigns are evidence to this. This is a clear indication that the role of the Thamilcholai schools lies in being a link between the Tamil diaspora and the LTTE. They will serve to fuel the flames of communal disharmony within and outside of Sri Lanka. Given below are the latest photographs that show how the children of these schools being exploited and used to promote the interest and ideology of terrorist organization that is banned in more than 32 countries, including the Europe Union.

http://www.priu.gov.lk/news_update/Current_Affairs/ca201112/20111207insight_into_ltte_administered_schools.htm

The Sri Lankan military blocked youth from across the North-East from attending a conference for the ‘Association of Friendship and Love’ (AFRIEL)

organised in Jaffna, reports Uthayan.

Soldiers at a military checkpoint in Poonakari questioned those travelling from Mannar for more than an hour and half, whilst others were contacted

on their mobiles and warned against participating in the event.

AFRIEL’s central committee member Ravendra De Silva said the Sri Lanka army and military intelligence had placed pressure on the organisers to

stop the event, interfering with attempts to book a venue as well as having a heavy military presence on the day of the conference. Thousands of

youth failed to attend following this military intimidation said De Silva.

However, the event went ahead regardless with more than 1500 people in attendance, including chief guest C V Wigneswaran, who was presented

with the “Journey to Freedom 2014 Youth Declarations”.

http://www.tamilguardian.com/article.asp?articleid=13118

79

POSITIVELY ENGAGE TAMIL LEADERS/ YOUTH LEADERS/ SENIOR CITIZENS AND DIASPORIC LEADERS TO DRAW –UP A COMMON AGENDA FOR RECONCILIATION Annex ‘G’

The Sri Lankan government has banned 15 Tamil diaspora organisations as “LTTE fronts”, reported the Daily Mirror on Monday.

The government banned the organisations as “foreign terrorists” under UN Security Council Resolution 1373 which was brought about by the USA on September 28, 2001 after the attack on the World Trade Centre.

A ban would make it a criminal offence for Sri Lankan citizens to maintain contacts with these organisations or its members, a move which is thought is likely to affect several members of Tamil political parties in Sri Lanka, the Daily Mirror said.

“It is learnt that the Sri Lankan ministry of External Affairs has gazetted legislation outlawing several organizations reportedly functioning in several countries including the USA, Canada Britain, Norway, Italy, Switzerland, France and Australia,” a report said, according to the paper.

“Among organisations proscribed are the Transnational Government of Tamil Eelam (TGTE) headed by New York lawyer Visuvanathan Ruthirakumaran, Global Tamil Forum headed by Catholic Priest Fr.SJ Emmanuel, the LTTE group led by Perinbanayagam Sivaparan alias Nediyavan and the tiger group led by Sekarampillai Vinayagamoorthy alias Vinayagam."

The Daily Mirror said that Minster of External Affair GL Peiris is expected to make an official announcement about the proscription later this week.

See below for list of organisations proscribed, as taken form the Daily Mirror.

01. Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam a.k.a LTTE a.k.a Tamil Tigers. 02. Tamil Rehabilitation Organization a.k.a TRO. 03. Tamil Coordinating Committee a.k.a TCC 04. British Tamil Forum a.k.a BTF 05. World Tamil Movement a.k.a WTM 06. Canadian Tamil Congress a.k.a CTC 07. Australian Tamil Congress a.k.a ATC 08. Global Tamil Forum a.k.a GTF 09. National Council Of Canadian Tamils a.k.a NCCT a.k.a Makkal Avai 10. Tamil National Council a.k.a TNC 11.Tamil Youth Organization a.k.a TYO 12. World Tamil Coordinating Committee a.k.a WTCC. 13. Transnational Government Of Tamil Eelam a.k.a TGTE 14. Tamil Eelam Peoples Assembly a.k.a TEPA

80

15 .World Tamil Relief Fund a.k.a WTRF 16. Headquarters Group a.k.a HQ Group

http://www.tamilguardian.com/article.asp?articleid=10496

POST-WAR MILITARY EXCESSES Annex ‘H’ -ARMY SCUFFLE IN KILLINOCHI INJURES TWO CHILDREN An adult and two children were admitted to hospital after being injured in a scuffle with army soldiers in Killinochi reports the Uthayan. A 46 year old man, who runs a sewing shop in the region, was attacked by an Sri Lankan army on Sunday night, resulting in injuries to his head. When locals gathered at the scene to find out what had happened, and seek justice, further army soldiers were called to the area, resulting in a further 2 children being injured during consequential scuffles. The children, aged 6 and 2, were admitted to hospital, after one was stomped on by a soldier. One of the soldiers involved in the scuffle was also admitted to hospital suffering mental illness. - MILITARY ANIMALS ATTACKED THE CHILDREN Six year old Brinda and two and a half year old Geetha were playing yesterday in the Kilinochchi Bharathipuram North area in the street corners. When these children were playing on the streets, nearby there is military camp, from this military camp certain military soldiers came and kicked a small girl and also these military animals slapped the other girl mercilessly. The moment, his uncle by name Chandrakumar saw these merciless acts of the military animals immediately went to the military camp and asked for justice for this incident. But, immediately, the military soldiers started attacking him severely. Due to their attacks, his head got severely injured and bleeding profusely. After seeing this act of injustice, the people gathered together against the military soldiers. Therefore, after seeing the public agitation the Army officials were trying to pacify them by saying the military soldier who made these attacks is insane and he is a mentally retarded person, by saying so they were trying to close this case.

81

Due to these Merciless Attacks by these Military Animals, the people of this area is very much disturbed and feared for the presence of the military camp in their areas. - JAFFNA UNI STUDENT ASSAULTED BY MILITARY INTELLIGENCE OFFICERS A student at the University of Jaffna was assaulted on Sunday evening, by four men who stated they were from Sri Lanka's military intelligence wing. The student, who is currently a second year undergraduate, was detained by the officers at 10pm local time and taken in front of university premises where the assault took place, reported the Uthayan newspaper. The officers then called a friend of the victim, a third year student, and demanded that he come immediately to the university in order to ensure his friend is released. The third year student, arrived with his friends and informed police officers. According to the paper, the intelligence officers escaped from the scene on motorbikes as Sri Lankan police officers and soldiers arrived. One intelligence officer was later identified as working in a nearby bank. -MILITARY GENERAL HANDS OVER 1,500 ACRES OF TAMIL LAND TO SINHALA SETTLEMENT PROJECT Over 1,500 acres of land belonging to Tamil families in Mullaithivu have been transferred to Sinhalese families resettled in Kokkuthoduvay reports TamilNet. The provincial land commissioner was instructed by the Sri Lankan military governor of the Northern Province, General Chandrasiri, to sign lands to Sinhala families under a ‘Mahaweli Development Scheme’ , sources told the paper. The decision was announced in a closed door meeting with the military governor, Tamil officials and further members of the Sri Lankan military, despite over 3,000 unresolved cases filed by Tamils regarding land ownership issues in the area. The latest announcement has upset the original inhabitants of the area, said northern provincial councilor Thurairasa Ravikaran. - NAVY SOLDIER AMONG 8 ARRESTED FOR GANG RAPE OF UNDERAGE GIRLS Eight suspects, including a navy soldier involved in the alleged gang rape of two 14-year-old girls in Kalutara, have been arrested. Police had initially arrested four suspects, including the navy soldier for allegedly raping the two girls.

Investigations have revealed that the four suspects had raped the victims on multiple occasions; at Panadura beach, at a rubber estate in Serupita, Kalutara South, and at a hotel in Kalutara North.

82

Police also said an army soldier is also alleged to have been involved in the gang rape. This soldier is absconding and investigations are underway to arrest him.

In addition, police have arrested the manager of the hotel where the suspects had sexually abused the girls. He has been arrested on charges of encouraging and abetting sexual abuse of underage girls by providing a room at the hotel to the suspects.

Meanwhile, when officers had also taken measures to take into custody the three-wheeler allegedly used by the suspects to take the girls. An individual who allegedly tried to prevent the seizure of the three-wheeler by fleeing with it was also taken into custody along with the three-wheeler.

Two other suspects who allegedly had mobile phones containing images of the gang rape, along with other sexually explicit images, have also been arrested.

All eight suspects were remanded till August 7, when they will be produced before an identification parade. Kalutara North Police are investigating.

-UNFINISHED WAR IN SRI LANKA THREATENS PARADISE REGAINED In the fishing village of Oori, two mothers await news of their young daughters who were taken to a care home three months ago after their alleged rape by members of the Sri Lankan navy. In a lawyer’s office in the town of Mannar, a middle-aged woman sobs uncontrollably as she recounts her five-year struggle to find her son, one of thousands of cases of young men and women who disappeared after being picked up by soldiers. While in the city of Jaffna, a fisherman, displaced from his village after the military took his land, remembers the good life he once had as he sits in the ramshackle tenement he now shares with hundreds of others like him. Sri Lanka is in its sixth year of peace. Shells and artillery fire no longer pound the Indian Ocean island’s north, children are no longer taken by insurgents to fight, and local tourists now flock to the palm-fringed beaches. But for many minority Tamils here, the end of the almost three-decade-long conflict – with the crushing defeat of the separatist Tamil Tigers in May 2009 – has brought little peace, despite government efforts to smother the former rebel stronghold with visible economic development. Behind the gleaming bridges, roads, schools and hospitals lie allegations of violations against Tamils by government forces, ranging from land grabs and intimidation to abduction and rape. Coupled with a culture of impunity, healing the wounds of war has been close to impossible, say Tamil war survivors.

83

Interviews conducted by the Thomson Reuters Foundation with analysts, diplomats, victims, lawyers, human rights groups, politicians, former rebels and war survivors suggest the rising disaffection felt by Tamils over continued abuses and a lack of reconciliation could again jeopardise the island’s peace. “The government has done much in terms of physical development – rebuilding roads, bridges and the railway system. But it has not prioritised reconciliation to help win over the hearts and minds of minority Tamils,” said one Western diplomat in Colombo, Sri Lanka’s capital. “No accountability on war crimes and no information on the disappeared, the still large military presence and its acquisition of people’s land are just some things which have led to a disenfranchised Tamil population, who could, in the medium- to long-term, once again rise up.” It is an argument the military does not refute. To be sure, it says the prospect of renewed violence by members of the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE), is real which is also why it cannot remove troops from the region just yet. Military officials claim there are thousands of former rebels still at large and being supported by Tamil groups based overseas, citing a EUROPOL report earlier this year which found networks active in countries such as Switzerland. -ICE CREAM PARLOURS AND THEATRES Once the world’s most ruthless insurgent group, the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE) took up arms in the 1980s for a separate homeland for marginalised minority Tamils – funded largely by the smuggling of arms and contraband, extortion and with money from overseas sympathisers. Since the war ended, President Mahinda Rajapaksa has invested $6 billion into the Northern Province, buoying the region’s growth rate to 18 percent in 2012/13 against the national average of 7 percent. Jaffna, once the war-torn administrative capital of the Tamil Tigers, is now bustling, with international banks such as HSBC to ice-cream parlours, cinema halls, and supermarkets. “If you see Jaffna today, it is totally different from during the war. Everything was in disarray, the agriculture fields, schools,” said Northern Province Governor G.A. Chandrasiri, a retired Sinhalese major-general who served as Jaffna commander during the conflict. “Children were taken out of schools and forced by the LTTE to fight. Now you will see all the children going to school.” Yet despite this development, many complain of a lack of jobs and opportunities. Young men returning from India where they fled as refugees now work as hotel porters despite having degrees, and fishermen displaced from coastal villages complain of only “odd jobs”.

84

Tamil politicians and religious leaders accuse authorities of giving jobs to the majority Sinhalese population, saying there is a policy of “Sinhalisation” – aimed at changing the predominately Tamil demographic in the north. Tamil names of places such as Mathngal and Kantharodai in Jaffna, have been changed to the Sinhala names of Jambukolapatuna and Kathurugoda, add residents. Chandrasiri refutes claims of “Sinhalisation”. “So many Tamils are coming back,” he said. “Of course, Sinhalese people are also coming to the north, but these are people whose homes were originally there but were chased out by the LTTE.” -“OPEN JAIL” What dampens much of Tamil confidence in a genuine reconciliation is the looming security presence in the north with countless high-walled military camps, packed security trucks and patrols, and soldiers running small shops and hotels. The army presence has also led to allegations of land grabs, a charge the military denies. In the coastal region of Palali, an area stretching along the Jaffna Peninsula, where the military has set up a high security zone, more than 2,800 fishermen’s families are fighting a legal battle to get their land back. “The government wants to move us to another place, but all we want is our own land back. We are fishermen, not labourers,” said Rajan Rajakantha, 42, who fled Palali 18 years ago. The biggest worry for Tamils in districts such as Mannar and Jaffna districts, as well as in the Eastern Province’s Trincomalee district, is intimidation. Security forces visit their homes and make phone calls, especially to parents searching for missing children and displaced families fighting for their land. Many sources interviewed by the Thomson Reuters Foundation insisted on meeting in secret locations and on the condition of anonymity. During one interview with a displaced fisherman fighting for his land, he received a call from the security forces. Later, the army visited him to ask about the interview. “It’s like an open jail. Twenty four hours a day, they are checking up on people or going to their houses asking for the identity cards,” said Primus Siraiva, a lawyer and provincial councillor of the main opposition Tamil National Alliance (TNA), a former rebel proxy political party which has a majority number of seats in the Northern Provincial Council.

85

-RAPE AND IMPUNITY Rajapaksa’s government is already facing a U.N. investigation over allegations of war crimes, particularly in the final months of the conflict when the rebels held more than 300,000 civilians as human shields as the military closed in. As many as 40,000 civilians were killed by both parties, but mostly by state forces, a U.N. panel said in 2011. The Sri Lankan government says 7,000 people died. Sri Lanka’s Foreign Minister G.L. Peiris says those moves in the United Nations are politically motivated. “It has nothing to do with the well-being of Sri Lanka, but it has a lot to do with the well-being of politicians in those countries and the influence the Tamil diaspora has in terms of its voting strength and funding,” Peiris said. The focus on events towards the close of the war appears to undermine widespread allegations of abductions, torture and rape by security forces in post-war Sri Lanka. A March report by Yasmin Sooka, a South African human rights activist who served on the Truth and Reconciliation Commission after apartheid, documented 40 cases of torture and sexual violence on men and women by the military in detention centres. In the fishing village of Oori on the Jaffna Peninsula, two mothers say they their two daughters were taken away in early July, after the girls, aged 9 and 11, alleged they had been molested and raped by two sailors from a nearby navy base. A lawyer representing the victims said the navy is denying the charges, and the girls have been taken to a care home. “I spoke to her in the hospital. She told me it was the navy men who tied her hands and blindfolded her,” said the mother of the 9-year-old victim. -“NOT CHILD’S PLAY” The island’s military spokesman, Brigadier Ruwan Wanigasooriya, admits there has been a rise in sexual crimes in the former war zone, but says only a few are related to the security forces that number around 160,000 in the region. “In cases of involvement of the army, we have taken action against them so there is no impunity,” he said. In view of “a very real threat” of the LTTE’s revival, the government has set no time frame to withdraw troops. There are up to 4,000 suspected militants still at large in the country, said Wanigasooriya, who are still being financially supported by members of the Tamil diaspora.

86

But some Tamil groups based in countries such as the United States say they may want a separate state but not more violence. “We believe only in an independent Tamil Eelam can Tamils live with peace, dignity and above all with physical security,” Visuvanathan Rudrakumaran, Prime Minister of the Transnational Government of Tamil Eelam (TGTE) told the Thomson Reuters Foundation by phone from New York. For many war survivors, however, the politics mean little. Most just want to know what happened to their loved ones who went missing in the war that killed tens of thousands. “They wants us to forget everything and move on. But it doesn’t work like that. I want my son back. I want to know where he is,” said Manuel Udaya Chandra, whose son was taken away by four men dressed in army fatigues in a white van in 2009. -NATIONAL SHAME: RAPISTS IN SRI LANKAN ARMED FORCES: The following statement issued by the Asian Human Rights Commission, a human rights body headquartered in Hong Kong S.A.R. There have been reports of an alleged abduction and rape of an eleven-year-old girl by a group of Navy officers, and of another nine-year-old girl treated in a similar manner. In the first case, the soldiers have been serving at Karainagar Navy base have been deployed to patrol Ureddikulam, Urkatturai, Karainagar city and Kytes. Seven were initially arrested and their names are Ajith Kumara, Rupasinghe Aarachilage Chamara Indika, Nadira Dilshan Ratnayake, Kudabalage Jayaweera, Indika Kumara Vithanarachchi, Ranasinghe Sumith Subash and Vikum Senage Piyasiri Dissanayake, all serving the Karainager Navy base. After the news of these rapes spread, the parents of the victims were threatened and they are reported to be living in fear. It is under these circumstances that an identification parade was held at the local magistrate’s courts, where all seven suspects were brought. The eleven-year-old girl, who earlier made a statement about the kidnapping and gang rape, failed to identify the sailors. There are serious grounds on which to believe that the girl was acting under stress and in fear as she and her parents have been threatened for exposing the rape. The medical report has confirmed that the girl was raped. However, the Navy officers were released on personal bail. Personal bail means signing a guarantee to appear in court, and if one does not appear then the amount given has to be paid to the court. One was given an order for personal bail at the amount of rs. 250, and the amount of rs. 5,000 was set for three others. The rape of a young child by members of the armed forces is a serious crime. The fact that the area where this happened is now under the control of the armed forces is another aspect which adds to the weight of the crime. Naturally, people in these areas live in great fear of the armed forces. Now that a report of a serious crime has been lodged against seven officers, the families of victims and the entire neighborhoods would be living in serious

87

fear. The girl’s failure to identify the perpetrators of the crime is quite likely to be due to such fear. She may even have been instructed by adults not to identify the perpetrators because her life and the life of her family would be in serious jeopardy if she does so. It is the duty of the leaders of the armed forces to guarantee security to those who report crimes committed by armed forces personnel, particularly in areas that are under the control of the armed forces, as there is no one who can guarantee the safety of people except the leaders of the armed forces themselves. Even the police cannot be expected to be in a position to guarantee security to the victim and her family, given the overwhelming presence of the armed forces. However, there is no evidence to support that the leaders of the armed forces and, in particular, the leadership of the Navy, has taken adequate measures to guarantee such security. It is also the duty of the government, and the Ministry of Defence and Urban Development in particular, to ensure the security of the civilians living in these areas. Of particular importance is the security of young children. There is no indication that the government is making any effort to guarantee such security in this instance and the normal situation that prevails in the country is that the government and the Defence Ministry promotes impunity. There have been protests in the streets by people demanding action on the part of the armed forces and the government. However, the usual response to such protests by the government is to ignore them. Thus, while a heinous crime against two children has been reported, there will in all likelihood be no serious attempt to guarantee proper investigations and the prosecution of the offenders. The fact is that, now, Sri Lanka does not have a public justice system. Any of the developments towards a public justice system that happened during the British colonial times and that were continued in the first few decades after independence have now been deliberately displaced and dismantled. The essential features of a public justice system are a government-funded and well-managed system of receiving and investigating into complaints, done through the police, an independent and impartial prosecution system, and a competent, committed and independent judiciary. All that is now lost. There is public understanding of this loss. Now everything depends on political influence and monetary power. Political influence prevails even over monetary power. This is the fate of all Sri Lankans now and these two cases of the rape of children by Navy officers is a stark exposure of the fate of every person in the country. Sri Lanka today is one of the most backward and primitive places when looked at from the point of view of the possibilities of justice meted out through a functioning public justice system. Unfortunately, even an issue as important as this has not become a part of the public discourse in Sri Lanka. While there are private murmurs about Sri Lanka as a lawless place, there is hardly any attempt to develop an organized resistance against the displacement and dismantling of justice.

88

To be without the assistance of a public justice system is essentially akin to slavery. The rapes of these two children at the hands of the country’s armed forces personnel and the aftermath, in which justice has been completely denied, makes the point starkly clear that between slaves and the people of Sri Lanka, there is not much of a distinction. No government that fails to maintain a functional public justice system could be considered a legitimate government. The situation is even worse when a government deliberately destroys the public justice system. The Rajapaksa government’s serious lack of legitimacy is being sharply expressed in these two incidents of the rape of children at the hands of officers of the armed forces. -GANG RAPE SUSPECTS [NAVY SAILORS] , IDENTIFIED BY THE POLICE GET POLITICAL TREATMENT AND BAILED OUT : A coordinating secretary of the President has reportedly ordered the police not to take action against the Navy personnel who had allegedly raped an 11-year old girl for 11 days as well as another 9-year old girl. The reports further indicate that the particular officer has called the Kytes Police on two occasions after the incidents and said that if they were put under remand custody that will cause the losing of moral among the forces. The particular crime has been recorded on 18 July 2014 in the register maintained by Kytes police regarding offenses against minors under the number 13/2014 reporting that a female minor has been kidnapped and gang raped. With reference to such cases it is mandatory to produce a JMO report before court. However, following the particular order when presenting facts before the court under the B report number B/64/2014 with regard to the case a JMO report has not been submitted, reports say. Following the above mentioned order, in order to ensure the issuing of bail the 7 sailors have not been produced before court with a JMO report but only with a statement claiming that the occurrence of rape is suspected based on the statement recorded from the girl. It is said that this was done to ease the bail procedure. The Chief Magistrate of Kytes ordered the 7 sailors to be kept under remand custody. However, the Kytes acting Magistrate had released the suspects. They were each released on a cash bail of Rs. 250 and three other personal bails amounting to Rs.5000. Karaingar rape: Navy sailors identified. The navy sailors who allegedly raped an 11 year old girl for 11 days and another 9 year old girl have been identified as Ajith Kumara, Rupasinghe Arachchilage Chamara Indika, Nadeera Dilshan Rathnayake, Kudabalage Jayaweera, Indika Kumara Vithanarachchi, Ranasinghe Sumith Subhash, Vikum Senage Piyasiri Dissanayake of Karainagar Navy base.

89

The sailors who have been serving at the Karainagar Navy base have been deployed on patrolling in Ureddikulam, Urkatturai, Karainagar city and Kytes. The OIC of Crime Division of Kytes Police SI R.K.B Ratnayake in the B report submitted to the court under B/64/2014 has mentioned that the above mentioned 7 suspects are produced before court under the suspicion of rape based on the minor’s statement claiming that they kidnapped and gang raped the girl. However, the Kytes acting Magistrate on 18th released the saliors, who were alleged of gang raping the minor, on bail on the grounds of one personal bail at the amount of Rs.250 and three other personal bails at the amount of Rs.5000. -ENLISTED TAMIL WOMEN RAPED BY SRI LANKAN MILITARY: Tamil women who were recently enlisted into the Sri Lankan military were taken from Mullaitheevu to a Sri Lankan military party in Mihintale and raped on Saturday, reports Tamilnet. After being returned to their original areas, the Tamil women’s complaints to the Sri Lankan police were ignored, whilst being belittled by the Sri Lankan military Civil Security Department (CSD). The CSD said that such practices by the Sri Lankan military were ‘routine’ a sexually harassed Tamil women told Tamilnet. A total of 47 conscripted Tamil women were sexually harassed and raped by Sri Lankan military personnel. -ARMY SERIOUSLY ATTEMPTING TO DISABLE THE “ITHU NAMTHESAM” NEWSPAPER PUBLISHED IN JAFFNA: Army seriously attempts to disable the “Ithu Namthesam” newspaper published in Jaffna The allegations have been made that the Sri Lanka Goverment through military is trying to disable the “Ithu Namthesam” newspaper being published from Jaffna. The military and the intelligence unit have been directly involved in attacking and threatening the distributors and sellers of Ithu Namthesam” newspaper, the newspaper administration said. Last month, one of the dealers who supplied newspapers was summoned to the Kilinochchi Uruthirupuram army camp and after the inquiries when he left for home, the soldiers followed him, attacked him and thrown him in the nearby pond.

90

Also the newspapers that he took for distribution were confiscated and were thrown in the pond. The dealers were also threatened many times like this. Already in the past, many times the army visited the sales outlets in Jaffna and Kilinochchi where the newspaper are being sold and threatened them. When the stall owners said that they are selling this newspaper like any other newspapers, they did not accept it and threatened them. Moreover those groups are saying that the press where they print also being threatened and army is threatening them that they should not publish without army’s permission. The editors of the newspaper have raised doubts of whether newspaper publishing can continue or not, sources said. This newspaper having political analyst C. A. Jothilingam mainly is involved in serious political field news and criticizing of current politics. It should be noted that many senior journalists have been writing columns in this newspaper. -THE MILITARY INTELLIGENCE OFFICERS THREATENED PEOPLE OF VALIGAMAM IN JAFFNA AGAINST CONDUCTING PUJA: The Valigamam people have decided to perform a puja to appeal them to be resettled in their own lands in Jaffna today. In this regard, the the military has threatened them against performing any puja there. Valigamam people have been displaced from their places for a long time and they have been living as refugees in camps. These people have conducted various protests requesting for resettlement in their lands and also gave petition to various authorities in this regard. Yesterday, people who have displaced and residing in the Chunnagam SabhapathiPillai camp and other people have announced that they are going to conduct a special puja on the eve of Ganesh Chaturthi. Following this, they made arrangements to hand over a memorandum to the President through the government officials, the Northern provincial Chief Minister and parliamentarians. The ritual ceremony plan was dropped, due to anonymous death threats to the people continuously and to Poonthazhirkal organization that arranged this event. However arrangements were made to hand over the petition to the President and the Northern Chief Minister, demanding them to be resettled. AFTER THE WAR MILITARY WAS NOT DE-MOBILIZED; BUT INTENSELY MOBILIZED AND DEPLOYED ALLOVER Annex ‘J’ The Defence Secretary Gotabaya Rajapaksa has ordered the Sri Lankan military to take “full control” of the relief centers, opened up for Upcountry Tamils displaced by the landslide, which affected the Meeriyabedda estate in Badulla district. Accordingly the army will control the feeding, health

91

and “entire management” of the displaced victims. Immediately Lieutenant General Ratnayake visited the Koslanda Sri Ganesha Tamil Vidyalaya and the Poona gala Tamil Vidyalaya centers and made arrangement for the take over. While this takeover happened in the south, in the north a United Nations official was stopped from entering the North, due to the Ministry of Defence’s newly re-introduced travel restrictions. Latter requires all foreign citizens to seek prior permission from the Ministry to enter the Tamil region in the North of the island. Beth Crawford, the country representative for the UN’s Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO), was turned away at Oman Thai check point. Crawford, who was appointed to Sri Lanka in July 2013, was reportedly on her way to Kilinochchi to mark World Food Day, on the invitation of the Northern Provincial Council Agriculture Minister P. Aingaranesan. The Tamil leaders claim that Sri Lankan government’s re-introduction of travel restrictions to the North, preventing all foreign citizens from entering the region without prior written permission from the Ministry of Defence, is aimed at stopping Tamils from giving evidence to the UN inquiry. One leader said “The fact that the travel restrictions on foreign passport holders to the North have come at this juncture, is not a surprise at all. The government would have been observing closely and its intelligence sources would have revealed that the Tamil victims of the most heinous crimes are very eager to give evidence to the OHCHR Investigation into Sri Lanka (OISL). The only hesitation Tamils have is with regards to how the evidence can be submitted whilst maintaining secrecy. One of the safest ways would be to transfer the evidence through diplomats or foreigners who would be most likely to be able to get the evidence out of the country safely”. Even in the Sinhala dominated south there is a strong criticism against the admission of the security forces to handle social management problems. It is a sign of fascistic style of politics to handover civil administration to military officers, who listen to commands from the top instead of referring legislation relevant to the social problem. On the other hand the military regiments are introduced as saviors of the people for any emergency. At the same time military leaders including the Defence secretary enter the minds of the people as socio political leaders, to be called in the event of an emergency. Instead of removing the security forces from the civil society after the end of the war, they have become indispensable apparatus to be used in construction, production and civil administration. They are not de-mobilized; no, they are intensely mobilized and deployed allover the island. Against this severe criticism the government has put forward lame excuses. the ruling United People’s Freedom Alliance (UPFA) coalition party’s general secretary said recently that Travel restrictions have been placed on the North to prevent foreign elements funding another war against the Sri Lankan government. Minister Susil Premajayanth added that the lifting of the European Union ban on the LTTE could be due to the campaign of pro-LTTE diaspora who believe in separation and stressed that the government had a responsibility to prevent another war. The minister added that “the pro-LTTE diaspora is very much active in the EU and pushed for the ban on the LTTE to be lifted. The Government has a responsibility to prevent another war from taking place and so such security measures have to be taken.” Most Tamil leaders expect this fascistic action of the government to open the eyes of the global capitalist powers. “These measures taken by government of Sri Lanka only highlight the pressing need for the UN to seriously consider, as the next step, the need to find the means of creating direct access to the greatest reservoir of evidence of the mass crimes committed against the Tamils, which is the people on the ground” one Tamil leader said. Unfortunately global capitalism is satisfied with the development programme carried out by the government. The real protest against the militaristic fascist styled government has come from the mass

92

protest in the south. It is growing fast, as admitted by the government when it produced a budget with different clips to satisfy every body in the Lankan society. Militarization as a way of life: an ‘Orwellian’ note from Kilinochchi

(http://blog.srilankacampaign.org/2013/05/militarization-as-way-of-life-orwellian.html)

Even though the protracted internal armed conflict has ended, community members have been unable to return to their day-to-day lives. Under the administration of Mahinda Rajapaksa, Sri Lanka’s militarization has continued unabated. The Sri Lanka Army (SLA) has established numerous checkpoints and camps near peoples’ homes. Military personnel frequently patrol these areas – day and night. Sadly, the military’s intrusion into practically all aspects of civilian affairs remains a way of life in the conflict-affected North and East. At the entrance to Kanthi Kiramam (Kilinochchi), there is a small army camp. Members of the 7th Battalion of the Sri Lanka National Guard (7SLNG) reside there.[1] A checkpoint is located on the other side of the camp, adjacent to a bus stop. At least three members of the military are actually living at that checkpoint. A brief history of this checkpoint may be of interest to both domestic and international observers. Checkpoint Installation: Sequence of Events and Dubious Reasoning Community members opposed the establishment of this checkpoint. Many community members said that such a checkpoint would frighten people while waiting for the bus. To be clear, this is an important location; community members in Kanthi Kiramam and Konavil East use this bus stop. People sometimes have to wait for the bus for extended periods of time, so a range of topics are consistently discussed at this key area. Moreover, such a space is crucial given the restriction on the right to assemble in both private and public spheres. Students, young girls and community leaders gather there on a regular basis as a form political engagement, to discuss all kinds of topics, ranging from the trivial to the political (such as the upcoming provincial council elections). In January 2013, military personnel started building the checkpoint. The following month, during the first week of February, community members went to the 7SLNG camp and requested that the military stop building. Nonetheless, by the end of the first week of February, the checkpoint was in place. This has disrupted peoples’ daily lives, as people are now reluctant and afraid to use this bus stop. Moreover, a playground was also located in this area, but now fewer young people and children are playing there. The significant encroachment on peoples’ lives through checkpoints has institutionalized the government’s capacity to surveil and control the (targeted) ethnic Tamil population.

93

People are afraid of the military. In terms of location and surveillance, this is a strategically important area. From this recently installed checkpoint, the military is able to monitor both Kanthi Kiramam and Konavil East at the same time. As a justification, military personnel told community members that such a checkpoint is necessary in order to curb the illegal excavation of sand. Evidently, military personnel were not interested in what community members thought. More than 185 families are living in Kanthi Kiramam.[2] These houses are located in an area which is approximately 400 meters north of Skandapuram Road (outside of Kilinochchi town). There is a community hall and a Grama Sevaka office near these homes.[3] The military maintains a strong presence in this densely populated area. In the evenings, military personnel frequently loiter near the community hall for extended periods of time. A Return of Mystery Men? On March 14 and March 15, 2013, unidentified people went to Kanthi Kiramam and threatened community members. More specific information is recounted below. On March 14, 2013 at 10pm, two unidentified persons wearing black clothing approached a community member’s house and called out to him in broken Tamil. When the man came out of his house, the intruders told him to “go back inside.” As a result, the community member went back inside his house. Later, in another house about 500 meters from where the first incident occurred – while everyone was asleep – one of those very same persons[4] went and grabbed the neck of a twelve-year-old girl. The assailant told family members, “If you shout, we will cut her.” The assailants continued to threaten family members and used the child as a human shield. Once the girl’s brother discovered what was happening, he started shouting. At that time everyone in the house woke up and started to scream. The mysterious people subsequently ran away. After about thirty minutes, the assailants returned. They lit up the area with a torch light and called upon the husband to come out of the house. When the man came out, one of the assailants picked up an axe, which had been left just outside the house. The assailants ordered the man to have his wife come outside, but the man did not comply. When the wife became aware of what was happening, she began shouting. Once the neighbors heard the wife shouting, they rushed to the house. Then the assailants fled the scene again. The second time the perpetrators

94

came, they covered their faces with black cloth. Community members heard them speak in broken Tamil. After this incident, the affected community members went to the army camp nearby and lodged a complaint. Consequently, in the evenings some army personnel have been stationed along Skandapuram Road and several bylanes throughout the village. The following day, an unusually high number of military personnel were patrolling the area.[5] Nevertheless, on March 15, 2013 at 10.45pm two mysterious people approached a Female-Headed Household in the area.[6]The assailants opened a temporary door and tried to enter the home. Once those who were inside the house heard people trying to enter, they started to scream. Then the assailants fled the scene. The following day, the affected woman, along with community leaders, members of the Rural Development Society (RDS) and the Women’s Rural Development Society (WRDS) went to the army camp and lodged a complaint. More Impunity Since these incidents occurred, state security personnel have made virtually no effort to find the assailants; no one has been arrested for these crimes. Many community members believe that army personnel are responsible for these criminal acts. Since there are army installations on both ends of the village, the fact that mysterious people are still allowed to roam freely has created a palpable sense of anxiety throughout the community. Further, army personnel have clearly stated that if community members ever have visitors, then that information should be reported directly to the military. Yet, when unknown assailants come and bother people at night, army personnel appear to be either unable or unwilling to take resolute action. Conclusion It is TSA’s contention that the recent problems in Kanthi Kiramam are directly related to the fact that community members raised concerns about the building of the checkpoint. Community members complained, but – perhaps more importantly – they did not believe that the government really cares about cracking down on illegal business activities. Does the government of Sri Lanka really want to monitor illegal sand excavation? Or do they want to make sure that community members don’t forget that the military is watching? Or that the conclusion of war has resulted in de facto military occupation throughout the Northern Province? Whether these recent developments portend a new era of mystery men – a return of the Grease Yaka – remains to be seen. Nevertheless, it looks like these acts of violence are now being used to justify the checkpoint, as the military now seems to be citing security concerns as justification for continued state surveillance.

95

The final report of the Lessons Learnt and Reconciliation Commission (LLRC) calls upon the Government of Sri Lanka (GoSL) to reduce the army’s presence in the North and the East. Such a measure would allow people to move freely and help them to regain some semblance of normalcy post-war. Some people wonder if the government intends to place even more members of the army in this area – using the abovementioned incidents as a pretext for a heightened military presence. Were that to happen, such actions should be met with skepticism because this is a regime that simply cannot be trusted. [1] More than twenty members of the SLA reside in this camp. An officer holding the rank of “Major” is also stationed there. [2] The community members/victims involved in these incidents work as day laborers, meaning that most of these people live below the poverty line. [3] Community members come to the community hall for various reasons; community members from nearby villages also come to the Grama Sevaka’s office. [4] Community members who spoke with TSA identified the assailants based on their dress; community members also recognized their voices. [5] Evidently, state security personnel were only suspicious of civilians. [6] This house is approximately 700 meters from the house where the previous incident occurred.

The continued militarization of Sri Lanka

(http://transcurrents.com/news-views/archives/5408)

24 October 2011, 9:11 pm

by Gibson Bateman

Led by President Mahinda Rajapaksa, post-war Sri Lanka is a sad place. In May of 2009, the Sri Lankan government achieved a resounding military

victory over the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE).

Most of the LTTE’s leadership was killed. For the foreseeable future, it is hard to envision another Tamil nationalist movement taking up arms against

the state

96

Yet, if living in Sri Lanka, one might think that the conflict is still going on.

In post-war Sri Lanka, the militarization of the entire country has continued unabated. This development is less significant in the predominantly

Sinhalese south, where military personnel are often viewed as heroes for defeating the LTTE. But in the mostly Tamil north and east, they are viewed

as oppressors. Indeed the military’s presence in the north and east (both former LTTE strongholds where much of the fighting took place) is

disturbing. State security personnel wield enormous influence over all aspects of people’s lives.

Precise statistics about military employment in Sri Lanka are not publicly available, but some of the most disturbing effects of this ubiquitous military

presence are often left out of statistical analyses anyway. Members of the armed forces are literally everywhere. People are living in fear, especially

single Tamil women who lost their husbands during the war.

Several weeks ago, a friend and I travelled along Sri Lanka’s A-9 in northern Sri Lanka, the road that leads from Vavuniya up to Jaffna. The entire area

is teeming with army members. We passed through a number of checkpoints. What’s even more disturbing is the military’s obvious intrusion into

civilian affairs. On our way up to Jaffna, my friend and I decided to grab a quick cup of coffee at what can be vaguely described as a Sri Lankan

roadside café. We were served by an army guy. Army personnel are also working in various shops where household items are sold. I have read that

the military has even gotten involved in tourism. This is absurd. The war is over. Tamil people already have been stripped of their dignity and they

are now forced to live under de facto military occupation.

The local elections held in July in the country’s north and east show how unhappy people living there are. The ruling United People’s Freedom

Alliance (UPFA) dominated the rest of the country, but they got little support in the north and the east. The government maintains that reconstruction

and development in the north and east is going along swimmingly. This obviously is not the case. People in these areas have rejected the

government’s development model, which focuses almost entirely on the pursuit of rapid economic growth as the way to address the legitimate

concerns of the Tamil people. These people want a political solution; they want a genuine devolution of power. They want to stop being treated like

inferior citizens in a land that they have occupied for thousands of years. But the Rajapaksa regime has given no indication it is open to a political

settlement for the Tamil people.

To be clear, making significant reductions in military employment requires planning.

The last thing the Rajapaksa regime wants is large numbers of unemployed youth who just finished fighting a long war. That is a recipe for increased

crime and civil unrest. But this government has not even thought about how decreasing military employment would work.

And, unfortunately, militarization fits in quite well with the current global political economy. Western countries like the US and the UK probably do

not really care about a militarized Sri Lanka. Just like Western countries probably do not care about exploring the allegations of war crimes and

crimes against humanity during the final phase of the conflict. The ambivalence from the international community to call for an international inquiry

97

is obvious. Rather, the threat of an international investigation is probably just being used as leverage to try and get some form of a political

settlement for the Tamil people. Besides, it is well-known that the Pentagon is pushing strongly for the US to open up a full-fledged military

relationship with Sri Lanka.

The unnecessary militarization of Sri Lanka is a message that human rights groups (both domestic and international) have not articulated enough.

There are a few important things to keep in mind. First, the government controls most of the media.

Second, there is already limited space to conduct human rights work in Sri Lanka.

While human rights defenders are brave, many would view talking about militarization as an unnecessary risk. Again, people are scared and fear is a

powerful thing. The last point has to do with broader geopolitical trends and people’s desire to sell arms.

In spite of the Europe Union’s criticism of Sri Lanka’s human rights record, many member states have continued to sell weapons to the government

since President Mahinda Rajapaksa first came to power in 2005. But this matters less when compared to China, which has been the country’s biggest

arms dealer for the past couple decades. Add these arms sales to China’s ability to provide unconditional loans with alacrity, and it is no wonder that

Rajapaksa regime has been looking east recently. As mentioned, the US Department of Defense has not given up on Sri Lanka either. The US

government did sell arms to the government during the civil war and, as mentioned, there are many in Washington, DC who would like to see more

weapons deals in the future.

For all of these reasons, a serious downsizing of the Sri Lankan military or a substantial decrease in military spending will remain unlikely for the

foreseeable future. courtesy: Journal of Foreign Relations.

ICRC NOTES 16,000 LANKANS MISSING Annex ‘K’ The International Committee of the Red Cross In the run-up to the International Day of the Disappeared, 30 August, ICRC is calling on the international community to show greater awareness of the tragedy of people who have gone missing and the plight of their families. Hundreds of thousands of people in all parts of the world have disappeared as a consequence of armed conflict, natural disaster or migration. The ICRC noted that each person who vanishes leaves behind a large number of people – the family in particular – suffering the anguish of not knowing what happened.

98

“When people disappear, there are two kinds of victims: the individuals who have gone missing and their families, torn between despair and hope, living with uncertainty and pain, waiting for news, sometimes for decades,” explained Marianne Pecassou, who heads the activities carried out by the ICRC for missing persons and their families. Although what the families need more than anything else is to find out just what happened to their relatives, they also need an appropriate way to honour the memory of their missing loved ones. “They struggle against forgetting. Commemorative ceremonies offer them public acknowledgement of their suffering, give them a voice and bring them out of isolation,” said Ms Pecassou. To mark the International Day of the Disappeared, the ICRC is unveiling a new publication entitled “Living with Absence: Helping the Families of the Missing,” which highlights the ordeal of people unaccounted for, underlines the multiple needs of the families and describes the tailored responses the ICRC is providing. The content is enriched by personal narratives of relatives of missing persons. “States have an obligation under international humanitarian law to take all feasible measures to clarify the fate and whereabouts of people who have gone missing and to inform their families accordingly,” said Christine Beerli, vice-president of the ICRC, at a commemorative event at ICRC headquarters attended by government representatives and members of the humanitarian and diplomatic communities of Geneva. The plight of people who have disappeared – and the suffering of their families, all too often ignored – has been a constant concern of the ICRC. The organization is currently attempting to establish the fate and whereabouts of more than 52,000 people. “This figure is just the tip of the iceberg, since these cases are only the ones brought to the attention of the ICRC by relatives. We know that many more people remain unaccounted for around the world,” said Ms Pecassou. Besides working directly with the families of missing persons, the ICRC plays an important role in bringing the issue of the missing onto the public agenda. It urges the authorities to take action aimed at responding to the needs of the families and encourages the search for their missing loved ones. ACTIVISTS PETITION MPS ON THE MISSING: As Sri Lanka marked its National Day for the Disappeared today, activists petitioned parliamentarians to bring justice for the tens of thousands of disappeared in the country. Sandhya Eknaligoda, wife of disappeared political cartoonist Prageeth Eknaligoda, together with other mothers of the disappeared today met with parliamentarians to present a poster calling for an end to enforced disappearances. They asked the Government of Sri Lanka to ratify the International Convention for the Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearance, and invite the UN Working Group on Enforced Disappearances to visit the country. “The number of disappeared people in Sri Lanka since the 1980s is second only to Iraq globally. The government’s efforts to address this issue – including to investigate cases of enforced disappearances, to provide redress to their families, to hold those responsible to account and to memorialize those missing appropriately – have been wholly inadequate. It is time for the government’s orchestrated lies and broken promises to be replaced with a genuine commitment to the truth,” said Richard Bennett, Amnesty International’s Asia Pacific Director.

99

“Prageeth Eknaligoda’s case is emblematic of the almost complete impunity that surrounds disappearances in Sri Lanka. Parliament must take note of her Sandya and other families search for truth”. Amnesty International is concerned that families of missing persons protesting against enforced disappearances and the organizers of those demonstrations have been harassed and assaulted in recent months. Human rights activists and families seeking accountability often risk reprisals for communication with international organizations. As recently as 26 October posters smearing the organizers of a commemoration event for the disappeared held in Seeduwa were posted near the organisers’ house. Amnesty International said the Government of Sri Lanka should support commemoration such as this and ratify the International Convention for the Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearance.

“DEATHS IN POLICE CUSTODY ARE OF SERIOUS CONCERN” Annex ‘L’

-THE STANDING COMMITTEE ON RULE OF LAW, BAR ASSOCIATION OF SRI LANKA YESTERDAY ISSUED THE FOLLOWING STATEMENT

The series of deaths of persons in police custody as suspects regarding the commission of criminal offences is of serious concern.The identical explanations given by the police regarding each such case of death while in custody and acceptance of such blatant manifest untruths has made a mockery of the system of administration of justice in our country. It is an insult to the intelligence of our people if the police expect the people to believe these fantasy stories about attacks on them by suspects while in custody and handcuffed.

Unchecked and unchallenged

What is strange is that these cases of brutal murder have gone unchecked and the absurd explanations given by the police have gone unchallenged.These killings violate all international conventions on protection of persons in state custody and are in violation of the right to life as proclaimed in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. It is enshrined in our constitution that every person is presumed to be innocent till proved guilty by a competent court (Article 13(5)), no person shall be punished with death or imprisonment except by order of a competent court (Article 13(4)), any person charged with an offence is entitled to be heard at a fair trial by a competent court (Article 13(3)), any person shall not be held in custody, detained or deprived of personal liberty except upon order of a judge made in accordance with procedure established by law (Article 13(2)).

Operating with impunity

While these murders are in violation of the constitution what is of grave concern is the impunity with which these murders are committed. In no country that respects rule of law and democratic governance can these acts be condoned under any circumstances and the responsibility lies with the state to account for these violations of fundamental rights.Failure to act decisively against such persons responsible for the commission of these crimes, adversely affect the image of our country and the people lose faith in the judicial system of our country.

100

Call for full inquiry

Nothing short of a full inquiry by a commission of inquiry to be constituted of present or retired judges of the Superior Courts can redeem the image of the country and restore confidence in the administration of justice. Therefore we demand the appointment of such a judicial commission to inquire and report on the deaths of suspects under police custody during the last at least three years.

-A GREAT TRAVESTY OF JUSTICE -AN APPEAL TO THE CIVIL SOCIETY TO INTERVENE IN THE MURDER A 17-year-old boy named, P.H. Sadun Mallinga, from Atturukudua, Megahakiula, was arrested with his brother and brutally assaulted by a group of policemen from the Kandaketiya police without any reason. He died at the remand prison due to the severe injuries he suffered by the assault. He died in his brother's arms. Now the brother who is still in remand prison is suffering from mental stress and is in need of immediate treatment. However, he is unable to get such treatment as the police, after severely beating them, made false allegations and filed a case before the Magistrate's Court of Badulla where they were remanded. The Asian Human Rights Commission (AHRC) is urging civil society organisations and individuals to intervene urgently to stop this travesty of justice. The police who have committed a murder are enjoying their freedom while the brother of the victim is being held in prison on false charges made by the murderers. A short summary of the case is as follows: On May 7, 2014, Sadun Mallinga with his brother, P.H. Kashun Nirage Maduwa and a cousin went to see a three-wheeler which was to be sold. On the way they were caught by a group of ten policemen which included Sub Inspector (SI) R.M.P. Somaratne. They were assaulted upon arrest and thereafter taken to the police station where the assault continued. While Sadun Mallinga was complaining about the severe pain he was suffering and requesting medical treatment the police kept them in a cell. The next day at around 2:30 pm when the parents arrived at the police station they found Sadun Mallinga crying out loudly in pain. The boy told the parents that SI Somaratne and several other officers had assaulted him and that he had severe chest pains. His mother immediately made a request to the police officers to take her son to a hospital. However, the police officers told her that no senior officer was present at that time and that they should come back the next day. The parents returned the following day and found their son lying on the floor and complaining about chest pains. The parents again pleaded with the police to send their child to a hospital. However, the police refused using foul language and told the parents that their sons would be produced in the Magistrate's Court of Badulla. The parents went to the court but the boys were not produced. On telephoning the police station they found that the boys had been taken to the court at Passara. The parents then went to the Passara Police Station and sought the help of two lawyers and requested them also to inform the court that Sadun Mallinga had been severely assaulted by the police. The boy and the other accused were produced in court only at around 3 pm and as the official work of the court was finished the case was taken up at the Magistrate's Chambers. The police wanted the Magistrate to remand the accused until May 21. The lawyers who appeared for the suspects informed the Magistrate that Sadun Mallinga had been severely assaulted and needed medical

101

treatment. Besides this, Sadun Mallinga himself told the Magistrate that he had been assaulted by the police. However, the lady magistrate did not make any order regarding medical treatment and ordered the suspects remanded until May 21. Accordingly the suspects were then taken into remand and the parents informed some of the prison officers that their son had been assaulted and needed medical treatment. However, the prison authorities did not take any steps to refer him even to the prison hospital. On morning of May 9, Sadun Mallinga died as his brother was holding him in his arms. The following day the boy's body was subjected to a post mortem where the Judicial Medical Officer concluded that the reason for his death was internal bleeding caused by the assault. The AHRC draws the attention of the civil society in Sri Lanka that the police officers, the lady magistrate and the prison officers are all responsible for the death of Sadun Mallinga. We wish especially to emphasise the responsibility of the lady magistrate who failed to take action even after lawyers and the suspect himself made requests for medical treatment. She should be held responsible together with the police and the prison officers for his death. The scandalous situation is that while all these culprits to a murder remain scot free the family of the deceased child is further tormented due to the orders of the Magistrate to keep the other family members in remand. The family is aware that Sadun Mallinga's brother in whose arms he died is in severe mental distress and the family is afraid that he may suffer a complete breakdown but they are unable to do anything as he is being kept in remand on court orders. The AHRC wishes to draw the attention of the civil society of Sri Lanka that this is a case that deserves their immediate attention in order to avoid the continuing consequences of a grave travesty of justice. SRI LANKA: ENFORCED DISAPPEARANCES AND EXTRAJUDICIAL KILLINGS Annex ‘M’ 1. Although, technically speaking, enforced disappearances and extrajudicial killings are two distinct categories of gross violations of human rights, these two categories often overlap in Sri Lanka. Often, what get classified as enforced disappearances are kidnappings followed by interrogation, which often involve the use of torture and ill-treatment, followed by executions done in secret and, finally, the secret disposal of bodies. Despite several commissions looking into involuntary disappearances having made extensive observations and recommendations on the nature of enforced disappearances in Sri Lanka and ways to avoid the same, successive governments have failed to implement these recommendations. The following are observations and recommendations from ALRC to the Council on the issue of enforced disappearances in Sri Lanka. 2. Successive governments have refused to make Sri Lanka a signatory to the International Convention for the Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearances. This refusal to become a party to the convention has arisen from the premise that forbidding enforced disappearances is an undue restriction on the police, military, and other law enforcement agencies. The government’s approval for resorting to enforced disappearances under certain circumstances is implied in the government’s refusal to become a party to this convention. This position is contrary to

102

the government’s obligations under international law and under the normal obligations of legitimate governance. As long as the government of Sri Lanka refuses to become a signatory to this Convention, it is justifiable to accuse it of being complicit in allowing enforced disappearances. 3. Sri Lanka’s justice system has not developed an effective mechanism for investigating and prosecuting enforced disappearances. Due to the failure to develop an effective law enforcement mechanism, capable and willing to investigate enforced disappearances and prosecute perpetrators, the government can be justifiably accused of overtly and covertly pursuing a policy of allowing enforced disappearances. 4. In Sri Lanka, there prevails a climate of fear, wherein relatives of victims of enforced disappearances are intimidated away from making complaints and pursuing justice in relation to enforced disappearances. So long as such a situation of fear and intimidation prevails, the government of Sri Lanka can be accused of encouraging the practice of enforced disappearances. 5. Ever since the resolution entitled “Promoting reconciliation, accountability and human rights in Sri Lanka” was passed at the Human Rights Council, there has been heavy propaganda. This propaganda has painted anyone wishing to give evidence before the committee assigned by the council to investigate into human rights abuses under the said resolution, or wishing to assist victims and relatives, as being unpatriotic and, therefore, deserving of reprisals from the government and its supporters. 6. There have been mob attacks, some led by Buddhist monks, on several meetings organized by civil society groups, to express solidarity with the families of disappeared persons. The government, in its failure to enforce the law against such attackers, has encouraged a policy of intimidation against the families of the disappeared, as well as civil society organisations that are merely carrying out their obligations to extend support to families of victims of gross violations of human rights. 7. Fear of abductions, which may be followed by enforced disappearances, prevails in all parts of the country, in particular, in the North and the East. It has virtually become an invitation for serious reprisals, to be witness to a crime allegedly committed by the police, military, or other government agency. The government’s propaganda machinery, through the media, has been mobilized to carry out a campaign against persons who wish to give evidence as witnesses to enforced disappearances and other human rights abuses. Allowing such propaganda to take place through its media channels gives rise to a justifiable accusation that the government is involved in the suppression of persons who wish to become witnesses against crime, particularly in incidents of gross violations of human rights. 8. The fear of reprisals prevalent in the country is an obstacle to any attempt at accountability and reconciliation in Sri Lanka. By allowing such a state of fear and intimidation, the government can be justifiably accused of openly acting against every initiative towards accountability and reconciliation. 9. Besides enforced disappearances, there have also been other forms of extrajudicial killings. One such form is through torture at the police stations. The case of Sandun Malinga, a 17-year-old boy who was tortured and later killed at Kandaketiya Police Station, is one such extrajudicial killing through torture. Another form of extrajudicial killings is shootings by police officers, who have recently been issued with guns through an order of the Ministry of Defence. Two such killings are that of 24-year-old Subash Indika and 19-year-old S.M. Kelum Subasinghe. Further, there have been several killings of suspects in police custody by officers under the pretext of self-defence. As a general rule, no serious inquiries into allegations of such extrajudicial killings have resulted.

103

10. The Asian Legal Resource Centre respectfully submits that one of the major causes of enforced disappearances, as well as extrajudicial killings, is the virtual collapse of the public justice system within Sri Lanka, due to politicization of the police, prosecutorial branch, and the judiciary, which, in turn, is a result of the authoritarian form of government that has developed due to the 1978 Constitution and reinforced by the 18th Constitutional Amendment. We further submit that until this constitutional framework favouring authoritarianism is dismantled, enforced disappearances and extrajudicial killings will likely continue with impunity. About the ALRC: The Asian Legal Resource Centre is an independent regional non-governmental organisation holding general consultative status with the Economic and Social Council of the United Nations. It is the sister organisation of the Asian Human Rights Commission. The Hong Kong-based group seeks to strengthen and encourage positive action on legal and human rights issues at the local and national levels throughout Asia.

CASES ON MASS GRAVES Annex ‘N’ CASES ON MASS GRAVES AT MATALE TAKEN ALONG A DIFFERENT DIRECTION: The authorities are making an attempt to divert the period of the mass grave at Matale in a different direction despite it was pronounced in courts that it belonged to 1986 – 1990 period says the Secretary of Foreign Affairs of the JVP Somawansa Amarasinghe. This was stated to the media by Mr. Amarasinghe when the hearing of the case took place on the 18th. A senior officer of the CID had told court that the radiocarbon dating report received by the CID from the US indicates the skeletal remains found at the mass grave belonged to 1950 period. The court had given permission to send skeletal remains to the US for the radiocarbon dating test. Despite lawyers representing plaintiffs asking for the report, it had not been made available to them while the hearing has been postponed till 5th December. There were signs that the hearing would be concluded on this day. The Member of the Political Bureau of the JVP Somawansa Amarasinghe who had gone to observe the proceedings answering questions by journalists said the skeletal remains relevant to the case definitely belonged to the 1986 – 1990 period and not of those who had died before 1950 as police attempt to establish. He said there are doubts whether the skeletal remains sent to the US for the test were those that were removed from Matale mass grave. Failure to reveal contents of the US report and not providing the report from US to the lawyers are reasons to be suspicious said Mr. Amarasinghe. Various individuals had attempted to sabotage the investigations from the day skeletal remains were discovered from the hospital premises at Matale said Mr. Amarasinghe adding that it has been revealed that a powerful person of the present government had been in charge of the operations in Matale District during 1988-89 period.

104

He said there is information that a large number of mass graves exist in various parts of the country but carrying out any investigation while the present government is in office would not serve any purpose. He said evidence regarding 1989-90 period covered by earth would protect them for a future investigation. The Member of the Political Bureau of the JVP said investigations regarding incidents that occurred during 1987-90 period would be definitely carried out under a people’s government and all those who are responsible for crimes would be taken before courts. THE CASE OF MAANTHAI MASS GRAVE IN MANNAR – FINAL REPORT TO BE SUBMITTED ON 27TH IN THE COURT: As the excavation operation of the mass human grave of Maanthai in Mannar is completed. The 3rd final report will be presented in the Mannar court on 27th October. The present report is being prepared, Anuradhapura Special Judical Medical Officer (JMO) Thanansaya Vaithiyarathna said. On last December 20th while digging for the setting up of water pipes in the Mannar – Thiruketheeswaram street in Maanthai area human skeletons have been excavated. The police carried out a series of investigation and this was brought to the notice of Mannar Magistrate. Later the excavation process was started in presence of the Mannar Magistrate Ananthi Kanaganthram. During this process about 81 human skeletons were recovered.

MEDIA FREEDOM IS A QUESTION MARK IN SRI LANKA – RAYAPPU JOSEPH Annex ‘P’ The Tamil newspaper “Puthiyavan” has celebrated its 150th issue event in Mannar. This ceremony was chaired by the Puthiyavan deputy editor, Makkal Kadar and the chief guest for the the occasion were Bishop of Mannar Rev. Father Dr. Rayappu Joseph Andagai and Tamil Arasu party’s general secretary MP Mavai Senathirajah. The special guests were Additional Government Chief Officer for Mannar Mrs. Sranley Timel and Northern Provincial Health Department Director Mrs. Yathrathani. Parlimentarians C. Sritharan, Sivasakthi Anandan, Northern Provincial Secretary C.V.K. Sivangnanam, Northern Provincial councillors, lifetime professor Chitrambalam, Mannar Mayor, journalists and activists took part in this event. The key people in their speech praised and blessed the past reports and daily activities of the Puthiyavan newspaper. The closing speech was given by the newspaper’s chief editor Sivakaran. The blessing speech was given by Bishop of Mannar Rayappu Joseph ,

105

Media means bringing out real facts, but in countries like Sri Lanka the freedom of press is a big question mark. The facts such as many journalists are being murdered, gone missing and media offices are being attacked are the continuous long-standing unfortunate positions of media today. With the fear that the truth will be revealed, the government forces are involved in these kinds of attacks. Parliamentarian C. Sritharan in this congratulating speech, It is surprising to think about this. In this country, with such restrictions and problems faced by media, the media functions are standing with a might and arising from it like a Phoenix bird now. It is a big question here, if the space and respect that has to be there for media is there. But especially Tamil media has crossed such challenges and it is praise-worthy. When a journalist writes without surrendering his pen as a weapon in this situation means there is some common reason behind it. If we look at the success behind the Puthiyavan daily newspaper, we can say that the people behind it are making it possible. Speech by MP Sivashakti Anandan, The duty of the media is to indicate any wrongdoing of people and Puthiyavan newspaper has been doing this so far. Speech by lifetime professor Chittambalam, Today, despite all its purity of writings and speeches about the Tamil nationalism, its purity is confined into the hands of trespassers and election business. However it has become the need of time. If we do not act with honesty and with integrity, the suffering of the our people will continue. People who lead the Tamil nation without partiality and with honesty should be functioning as guardians of the Tamil Nationalism. In this way, the work of Puthiyavan newspaper in making Tamil Nationalism proper is praise-worthy. THE ROAD TO JUSTICE - BREAKING THE CYCLE OF IMPUNITY IN THE KILLING OF JOURNALISTS Sri Lanka placed 4th – after Iraq, Somalia and Colombia - among top ten countries with greatest threat to press freedom. The lack of justice in hundreds of murders of journalists around the world is one of the greatest threats to press freedom today. While international attention to the issue has grown over the past decade, there has been little progress in bringing down rates of impunity. States will have to demonstrate far more political will to implement international commitments to make an impact on the high rates of targeted violence that journalists routinely face. A special report by the Committee to Protect Journalists… CPJ research shows that in 88 percent of cases of journalist slayings around the world, the masterminds behind the murders face no consequences, even when their accomplices are apprehended. Impunity ratings of the 10 countries that have appeared on CPJ’s Impunity Index each year from its inception in 2008.

106

TRANSPARENCY INTERNATIONAL CONDEMNS HARASSMENT OF ITS LANKAN CHAPTER Annex ‘Q’ Transparency Intern-ational, the global anti-corruption movement, in a statement yesterday condemned the continued harassment of its chapter in Sri Lanka, including a growing number of death threats to the staff, and demands the government investigate. Transparency International Sri Lanka’s work is centred on fighting corruption in Sri Lanka. To this end it has monitored elections, trained local government officials on budget transparency and has run a series of workshops to train journalists on how to uncover corruption in the both the public and private sectors. In the past few months there has been an escalation in the number of threats the chapter has faced, although it has been under attack for several years. Family members of the staff have been threatened and people working for the chapter have had to be temporarily relocated. So far the security services have done little to help. “The Government should actively protect the space for civil society and condemn the continued attacks on Transparency International Sri Lanka. Its silence makes it complicit. We call on the authorities to both speak out against these actions and to investigate the threats,” said Elena Panfilova, vice-chair of Transparency International. This year three journalist training workshops and two other events organised by the chapter have been disrupted with threats of violence, forcing some venues to cancel the events. Transparency International Sri Lanka staff has been singled out and threatened. This comes at a time when the Government is actively trying to close the space for civil society in Sri Lanka and is threatening to introduce restrictive regulations. “The role of civil society is to hold those in power to account and to do this it must be allowed to function free from intimidation. The anti-corruption work that Transparency International Sri Lanka undertakes strengthens the trust that citizens have in their leaders by calling for more transparent government and educating citizens how to fight corruption,” said Panfilova. In October Transparency International’s membership passed a resolution calling on all governments to act now to safeguard the space for civil society in the fight against corruption and for basic rights to work free from fear, harassment and intimidation.

HOW CREDIBLE ARE STORIES OF RAPE IN NORTH SRI LANKA? Annex ‘R’ There are time-tested ways to embarrass a country. Rape, torture, kidnapping, genocide are just a handful and with mainstream media, roped in journalists, puppet UN officials, money-hungry NGOs forming a team to project ‘allegations’ & ‘stories’ without evidence or proof, a country is automatically declared guilty by default. Rape has been defined a war crime. It is unfair that global entities are using rape as a weapon and making a

107

mockery out of genuine cases of people who have been raped. Obviously, the negative publicity is meant to create a negative perception about Sri Lanka and its armed forces. This discussion attempts to draw attention to how credible the allegations of rape against Sri Lanka’s armed forces are. A few headlines across the internet will show how powerful negative publicity is in generating wrong perceptions. Sri Lankan Military raping Tamil Tigers” – Telegraph, UK Sri Lanka: Rape of Tamil Detainees” – Human Rights Watch – 41-page report, titled We Will Teach You a Lesson: Sexual Violence against Tamils by Sri Lankan Security Forces, provides detailed accounts of 75 cases of alleged rape and sexual abuse that occurred from 2006-2012 ‘Sri Lankan military ‘still raping and torturing suspected rebels’ – the Guardian Stop torture and rape by security forces in Sri Lanka” – International Truth and Justice Project Tamils still being raped and tortured in Sri Lanka” – Frances Harrison report/BBC The worst mass rape in history was by the Allied troops during World War 2. The rape of women from age of 8 to age of 80 is estimated to run into 2million rapes by Allied troops. More recently, the US Dept of Defense says that 19,000 sexual assaults annually occur in the US military while 237,878 are victims of rape annually in the US. The film ‘The Invisible War’ estimates that at least 500,000 women have been sexually assaulted in the US military since women joined the armed forces in the 1940s. That is an alarming number of US women raped by forces! So too is the UN’s own findings: Between 100,000-250,000 women were raped during the Rwandan genocide of Tutsi’s in 1994. Incidentally French military had fought side by side with the Rwandan army. More than 60,000 women were raped during civil war in Sierra Leone (1991-2002) More than 40,000 women were raped in Liberia (1989-2003) Close to 60,000 women were raped in the former Yugoslavia (1992-1995) Close to 200,000 women have been raped in DR Congo since 1998 Adding to the confusion is the coaching element in rape cases: The Toronto Sun reported that Namibians are coached on what to tell the Canadian authorities when they arrive. Namibians thus claim they are fleeing from violence against lesbians, female genital mutilations and forced marriages, issues that easily draw empathy from gullible Canadians and win refugee status. In fact the trauma coaching centres is a big money making business in the UK as well, with firms charging upto sterling pounds 5000-6000 for bruises to be inflicted to showcase they have been tortured by Sri Lankan security forces, cigarette butt burns on women to show that was part of the rape and harassment by Sri Lankan armed forces. What a lot of physical pain just to enter the UK, when all it should take is for the UK Government to allow any Tamil to immigrate to UK since tortured marks alone have sufficed to give them entry visa.

108

There is a political and business element in the rape scene into which UN and NGOs/INGOs are all involved. Organizations created exclusively to deal with rape obviously need funds and to obtain funds they need to have rape victims and to have rape victims the easiest way is to amongst their own network create the stories to generate shock big enough to ensure cheques flow to their accounts and generous people feel sad enough to donate for their ‘cause’. Blame game An aspect that cannot be ignored is the manner that all countries targeted for regime change find themselves suddenly slapped with the same set of accusations, with virtually identical statements issued from the same set of organizations and heads and confirmed by UN agencies sufficient enough for the same world leaders to declare R2P and humanitarian military intervention is the outcome. Thereafter, flow of arms to rebels and total chaos while the invading forces end up providing security for the corporates that arrive to take over all the resources that was the raison d’etre for regime change. The puppets installed are given a carte blanche to join in the booty and these are the people vying to take over and function as mouthpieces of the regime changing parties. What is the GENOCIDE of RAPE in Sri Lanka We have on the one hand scores of people who make allegations, spend lavishly to promote those allegations, take pains to debate and demand accountability but they cannot produce evidence. They claimed Sri Lanka killed 40,000 to 125,000 if not more Tamils but they cannot even produce 50 names of these dead. They claim Tamil refugees are harassed but it appears there are centers in the UK coaching them and paid to bruise them and then claim rape! While these accusers have no statistics or names, the Sri Lankan authorities have. Between 2008 to April 2014 there have been 105 cases of rape / 7 cases of attempted rape in both the North and East of Sri Lanka. 110 of the 112 rapes took place after May 2009 defeat of LTTE Of these 112 cases – 3 rape victims have been murdered (13 year old in Delft island in 2012 / 4 year old in Manditivu by 2 persons / 45 year old in Vavuniya) The 112 rape victims have been in the age group 3 years 8 months to 83 years old Of these 112 rapes victims 28 have been below 10 years of age None of these rapes have been committed by security forces personnel These were all civilian rapes and it has been tragic that 28 of these cases have been Tamils raping young children some of the accused were grandfathers and fathers even teachers. Nevertheless, since this aspect is of no interest to the human rights organizations who are determined to showcase that rape exists as a command structure in Sri Lanka’s North believing it is one of many other reasons good enough to demand the Sri Lankan forces to be removed from the North, the emphasis and publicity is given on rape by security forces ONLY, even if it means to create the story.

109

That’s where the HRW came in with its 2013 report titled ‘We will teach you a lesson: Sexual violence against Tamils by Sri Lankan Security Forces”. It was a 140 page report giving 75 cases of ALLEGED rape between 2006-2012. These alleged 75 cases were supposed to be the ‘widespread rape’ taking place in Sri Lanka. Sexual offences committed by the Army in the North – 2005 to 2013 (8 years) 12 cases of rape by army personnel 2 forms of action were taken a) Action filed against accused in court of law b) Army Inquiry Actions by Army Inquiry :- Discharged from army = 6 Accused not found guilty by army inquiry /but pending decision of court to decide = 1 Reduced to rank of Pte from L/Cpl = 1 Suspended on half pay = 1 Army inquiry pending = 3 Sexual offences committed by the Army in the East – 2005 to 2013 (8 years) 3 cases of rape by army personnel 2 forms of action were taken a) Action filed against accused in court of law b) Army Inquiry Actions by Army Inquiry :- Discharged from army = 2 Army inquiry pending = 1 Despite the false publicity on rape spread worldwide assisted by local cohorts the evidence and actions taken prove otherwise. There are only 15 cases of rape by army personnel in 8 years (2005 to 2013) of which 8 army personnel have been discharged from the army indicating clear action taken by the military whilst parallel court of law inquiry has also been carried out. Why are organizations distributing rape kits? However, there are organizations in Sri Lanka that claim rape takes place with ‘impunity’ in the North. The organization calling itself DAI is selling a rape kit at $20. The Guardian newspaper writing about the organization says During the civil and sectarian conflict, rape and other abuse was used

110

quite unequivocally as a weapon, primarily by military forces against civilian women and children.” – we find that hard to believe with just 15 cases of rape by the army in 8 years! Ironically the DAI initiative is funded by USAID and USAID was chased out of Russia for attempting regime change! The statement by Brad Adams of HRW is amusing too Sri Lankan security forces have committed untold numbers of rapes of Tamil men and women in custody,” Virtually all of those that claim to have been raped are those sitting awaiting refugee status and rape becomes just one of the avenues to win entry. Why have rapes in other parts of Sri Lanka been ignored? Is it not strange that all the emphasis on rape is directed only on North with the single intention of pin pointing the rapes to the armed forces? No attention has been given to rapes in the rest of the country for the obvious reason that it would dismiss the objective of accusing the armed forces of rape in the North. With this likelihood clear, it puts to shame all those pretending to be concerned about rape when rape to them is only a political and commercial tool. Sexual offences in Sri Lanka (2007 to 2013) in the 9 provinces in total = 11,531 (victim ratio 1.21:1000) Western Province reported the highest rapes for the 6 year period = 2219 offences Northern Province reported the least rapes for the 6 year period = 589 offences Comparing sexual offences during war and post war : Both North and East provinces have seen a 3% increase in sexual offences post-war Sinhalese community counts the highest victims with 9565 (Years 2007-2013) Tamil community victims 1638 Muslim community victims 453 What needs to be reiterated is that the ‘mass rape with impunity’ by the armed forces of Sri Lanka during an 8 year period (2005 to 2013) has just 15 cases in North Sri Lanka as against 11531 rapes taking place throughout the 9 provinces. It is obvious where the allegations are heading and rape has become a perfect means to demoralize the armed forces as well as publicly and internationally ridicule them whilst pressuring the Government to remove the army from the North. 15 cases even with rape kits made available at $20 and rape coaching at sterling pounds 5000 has not changed the status quo for the people of Sri Lanka are not fools to fall for the lies being concocted.

AN APPEAL TO THE NEXT PRESIDENT OF SRI LANKA BY WAR AFFECTED WOMEN Annex ‘S’ We, women directly impacted by war and working on issues of truth and justice, believe that the dawn of the new year in Sri Lanka provides an opening to address several urgent issues. The Presidential Election on 8 January 2015 presents an opportunity to the people of Sri Lanka to decide its

111

future, with the two main contenders being President Mahinda Rajapaksa and Maithripala Sirisena. Since the announcement of elections and campaigning in late 2014, we have observed the promises and pledges by all candidates and hoped there would be recognition of the issues faced by women affected by the war and post war conditions in Sri Lanka. We write this appeal as women who face daily challenges in Sri Lanka and as women from across the globe who have faced similar situations in the search for truth, justice and accountability. More than five years after the end of the war, women across Sri Lanka face numerous challenges in rebuilding their lives. Throughout the war, women all over Sri Lanka called for answers to the whereabouts of their missing loved ones and justice for the wrongs that occurred. This continues in the post war context. The most recent Presidential Commission appointed by President Rajapaksa commenced in 2013 as an investigation into the overwhelming numbers of enforced or involuntary disappearances, but was converted into one looking at a broad range of violations of human rights and international humanitarian law, a move that raised questions as to whether the present government is genuinely interested in revealing the fate of the tens of thousands missing. Although around 20,000 complaints were received, the Commission so far has moved at a snail’s pace. Serious issues have been raised regards its independence. Observations of its public proceedings also beg the question whether the commission is in actual fact interested and able to meet its mandate and whether this commission like the successive commissions before it is yet another tactic by the State to delay and subvert the call for truth and justice. Many women who search for their loved ones, for the basic right to know the truth, face threats, abuse and assault. Jeyakumari Balendran, whose son surrendered to the security forces, has been detained since 13 March 2014 without being produced in court or formally charged. Vibooshika, her 13 year old daughter, is separated from her and placed in the care of the State with limited visitation rights. The injustice Ms. Balendran has faced is not an isolated incident but indicative of the situation faced by many such families. Regardless of all these odds, thousands of women have gone before national commissions, committees and courts and appealed to international actors, including the United Nations Working Group on Enforced or Involuntary Disappearances (UNWGEID) and the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, to call for answers. The forthcoming election is the second Presidential election after the war. Since then, the North and East of Sri Lanka has undergone heightened militarisation. Around 89,000 women headed households in the former war areas struggle to address livelihood needs, look after their remaining family and in many cases also look for their missing loved ones. Despite numerous promises, no independent investigation into serious human rights violations has resulted in a successful prosecution and conviction of alleged perpetrators, a sign of the culture of impunity pervasive in post war Sri Lanka. We, the undersigned women both from Sri Lanka and outside take this moment to call on the candidates to publicly acknowledge the situation faced by a significant number of women across Sri Lanka. A public recognition of the situation of the thousands unaccounted for is vital if we as a country are to move forward. We also list several demands that must be addressed if peace and reconciliation are to be viable in Sri Lanka. Demands:

112

• Those being held under the Prevention of Terrorism Act (PTA) without charge should be released immediately or charged based on sound and credible evidence. Trials, including on-going trials, of those charged under the PTA should be expedited.

• Immediately publish a list of those who are detained, the reasons for their detention and the places where they are detained. This list should be shared with their family and legal counsel.

• Ensure unhindered access of family and legal counsel to all who are detained. • Ensure persons are held only at gazetted detention centres and close all unofficial detention centres. • Ensure constitutional safeguards and due process rights are protected in the conduct of arrests and detentions. • Take immediate steps to end torture, sexual violence and other inhumane treatment of those in custody and the investigation and prosecution

of those responsible. • An immediate investigation, arrest and prosecution of State and non State actors who are alleged to have committed enforced or involuntary

disappearances, and other grave human rights violations. • Introduce an effective witness and victim protection mechanism and action against anyone who threatens, coerces and harasses individuals

who continue to search for their missing loved ones. • Repeal the PTA and other laws that provide for broad powers to arrest and detain with limited recourse to due process. • Introduce reform in the investigative processes including amending the Commissions of Inquiry Act and ensure future restorative and

retributive processes are transparent, just and efficient. • Immediate steps to demilitarise the country, particularly the North and East and return all lands occupied by the security forces, police and

others to their rightful owners and to provide compensation. • Conduct independent investigations and allocate resources for identified mass graves and provide for technical and forensic expertise

required for next steps. • Provide for an inclusive process at memorialisation which is not limited to triumphalist war monuments but involves and captures the views

of families who have lost loved ones from across Sri Lanka. • Address the issue of intimidation and surveillance of war affected communities including former combatants and families of the disappeared. • Respect freedom of association and expression and facilitate a space for civil society, women’s groups and community groups to be able to

function freely without undue control and pressure from the State. This should include space for families and affected communities to mourn their dead.

• Facilitate pending visits by special procedures including the UNWGEID Signatures; THE WOES OF IDPS IN THE VALIKAMAM Annex ‘T’ The monsoon has set in. The life of the Internally Displaced People (IDPs) in Valikamam region of the Jaffna district is becoming miserable. Yet, the Tamil National Alliance, (TNA), leadership, who continue to exploit their miseries for political gains, has not found any alternative places of shelter for these hapless people to lessen their sense of deprivation.

113

The TNA leaders have so far not come forward even to accommodate some IDPs in their houses so that they could live with a roof over their head till such time they are sent back to their original homes in Myliddy, Thyiddy, Kankesanthurai, Vasavilan, Valalai and other places. The TNA leader’s only talk and this is what they have done so far – talk, talk and talk. They have under their control nearly 18 Pradeshiya Sabahs and also the Northern Provincial Council. Still they haven’t done anything to help the IDPs and get them a new deal. At Chunnakam in the Valikamam South Predeshiya Sabah region, where I presently live, there are four welfare centres- Sabapathy Camp, Kannaki Camp, Periya Mathavadi Camp and Pillaiyar camp. I was taken to the IDP centres to have a firsthand feel and also to know of their conditions. Sabapathy camp and Kannaki camps overlap each other and they are both located on the Sabathipillai Road. Both come under the Chunnakam East Grama Niladhari of the Uduvil Divisional Secretary’s Division. I was horrified to see the condition in these two welfare centres and was moved by the plight of the inmates. There are no proper houses. Roofs are mostly of tin sheets, almost corroded; the roofs leak during rains and the floor becomes a pool of water. How can they sleep or even sit in such a situation but that is their lot. There are about a dozen of common toilets and at times they have to wait in queues to ease them. The land around their houses has become marshy; the stagnant water has become breeding grounds for mosquitoes. There are one or two wells; but no running water. The Sabapathy Camp houses 120 IDP families and some 156 families live in the Kannaki camp. Mr. Anthony Quinn, one of the inmates of the Kannaki camp, told me that they had left their original places of abode in Myliddy located in Kankesanthurai area by 1990 and they were accommodated in a school in Chunnakam and by 1996 the Sabathy camp inmates were settled down in present lands. He said as more people from Myliddy and Thiyiddy came over and due to natural growth, people were housed in adjacent land and that camp began to be called Kannaki camp. I met the leader of the Kannaki Camp Mr. S. Nesan and Ms. S. Thamil Chelvi, the leader of the Sabapathy camp. I also interacted with a large number of inmates at the pre-school of Kannaki Camp. They all told me of their hardships and of their miserable plight and also of their lands, houses and gardens which are now under the high security zone. It was a real heart touching episode and subsequently I met Mr. Suntharam Arumainayagam, District Secretary (Government Agent) Jaffna. He explained the problems they are confronted with in bailing out IDPs from their present miserable condition.

114

The places, where they lived once today, falls under the High Security Zone, (HSZ), and as such to send IDPs back is a decision that can be taken at a high level. On October 13th when President Mahinda Rajapaksa presided over the District Development Committee meeting I made suggestions as follows: – 1. Divert the Mahaveli waters to the North – which was accepted by President Mahinda Rajapaksa and 2. Take over more than 2000 acres of existing state land available on the west of the Vallai Bridge located on the Jaffna – Point Pedro road and release at least same extent of land belonging to the people who are presently languishing as IDPs in camps. Even V.Anandasangaree, the leader of the TULF told me that it was a good, workable suggestion and he also pointed out that there is vast stretch of government land along the way to Sannathi Temple in the Atchuvely – Thondamanaru Road. As no decision has been so far taken to relocate the hundreds and thousands of IDPs living in camps, it was suggested that the action must be taken at least to take over the lands where these IDPs are living at present and block it out and build up model villages by distributing the land amongst the inmates, and by helping each of them to build a decent house. Subsequently I met Major General Uthaya Perera, Security Forces Commander of Jaffna and discussed with him about the plights of the inmates who are living in the Sabapathy and Kannaki camps. He explained to me that he has already made arrangements to build houses for a few hundred IDPs in the lands at Valalai that comes under the High Security Zone. I asked him what could be the other alternatives, and he replied the other option is to acquire the land where they live at present and distribute that land to them. He asked me to speak to the people and tell him of their opinion. He also put me on to with Brigadier Thilakaratne of 515 Brigade who deals with subject of resettlement. I met the Brigadier, and we decided to visit the camps to speak with the people. In the meantime, Brigadier Thilakaratne called the Divisional Secretary of Uduvil to ascertain whether there were any oral or written claims for the lands where the camps were situated. I learnt that Brigadier Thilakaratne was informed that there was no claimant for the land where Sabapathy and Kannaki camps are located. Brigadier Thilakaratne visited the camps along with me and explained to the occupants that the Government would consider helping them if they are interested in living on the land where their camps are presently located. Later I went alone and met jointly with the leaders of Sabapathy camp Ms. S. Thamil Chelvi, Kannaki Camp leader Mr. S. Nesan, Mr. Anthony Quinn and other inmates of both the camps.

115

We discussed at length and decided to request the Government to give the inmates each a piece of land so that they may own it and live there. In the course of the discussion, they revealed that the land where the two camps situated earlier belonged to the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam and the Separatist Tigers ran the Kamathenu Agricultural Farm on the very land. They also revealed that this land was earlier transferred by the owners to the LTTE before they left the country and the land was registered as the property of the LTTE in the land registry office of the LTTE. I also learnt that the land of the Periya Mathavadi camp too belonged to the LTTE and they have blocked out that vast land to the martyrs family. LTTE also gave mahogany tree plants to those martyrs’ families to plant at least a tree, in the lands allotted to them. When I visited the Periya Mathavadi Camp, I saw several fully grown mahogany trees; I learnt they were planted by LTTE carders. After the lengthy discussion I had with the inmates of the two camps – Sabapathy and Kannaki, they decided to ask for their houses and lands within the security zone area. Furthermore, in case they are not in a position to go to their lands immediately, they decided to ask for alternate lands and houses to start their life anew after more than two to twenty-five years in the so called welfare centres. They resolved to ask for lands for each them. They also stated that the land in which they were living now was earlier belonged to the LTTE and that the LTTE had run its Kamathenu agricultural farm; they also categorically stated that there were no claimants for the land Accordingly all the 276 families of both the camps individually made written requests to the Government of Sri Lanka to allocate each of them adequate land and also requested houses be built for them. They said that they were looked down by the society when they say that they are inmates of a welfare centre (IDP camp). They said they longed to be no more inmates of any welfare centre, but passionately wish to be living in a model village. I conveyed their decision to the Government of Sri Lanka and handed over the 276 individual appeals for lands and houses to the proper authorities. Brigadier Thilakaratne has since contacted me and said that they have agreed with the request of the inmates of Sabapathy and Kannaki camps and added that he would soon work out ways and means to allocate house sites to each of them. Subsequent to this decision, Brigadier Thilakaratne decided to find out the extent of the land available. Therefore he deployed a licensed surveyor and leveler to measure the lands and also directed the surveyor to block out the available land for 270 families at the rate of 11/2 larchams, nearly 15 perch per family.

116

When the surveyor started surveying the lands Valikamam North Pradeshiya Sabah Chairman Mr. Sugirthan and his deputy vice chairman Mr. Sajivan came and ordered the surveyor not to survey the lands. They claimed that these IDP camp lands belong to one of their friend in Australia and stated that their friend had sent them a fax to stop the survey and halt the acquisition process. The surveyor rejected their claim. He told them “You both are from Valikamam North Predesha Sabaha and therefore you have no authority to order me to stop the surveying”. He pointed out that the land in question is located in the Vali South Predesha Sabah area. The surveyor went to remark: “You only say that you are interfering on behalf of your friend and you both are holding elected offices and both of you are not interested in the welfare of the 276 IDP families, but only interested in safeguarding the interest of your friend. Why you are doing this I cannot understand”. The surveyor demanded to know whether Mr. Somasuntharam Sugirthan and Mr. Shanmugalingham Sajivan had any legal document to prevent him from surveying the lands. Both them – the Pradeshiya Sabah chairman and vice chairman failed to show any documents. Where upon the surveyor said: “I know pretty well what I am doing and there is no need for both of you to teach me anything”. He told them that he had been directed a high government - a Brigadier to do the survey and that he had the authorization letter. “I am just doing a job”, he remarked and went about with the survey. Subsequently, when I visited the spot along with Major Rashinthake Athauda of 515 Brigade of the Sri Lanka Army and both the Pradeshya Sabah officials started to engage in a conversation with me. “You can get whatever clarification you want from Major Rashinthake Athauda who is in charge of the project”, I told them. They spoke to Major Athaula and he tersely told them, “If you have any documents regarding the ownership of these lands, then you bring it and show it to me either here or at my Brigade office in Kankesanthurai. After this meeting and discussion both Mr. Sugirthan and Mr. Sajivan contacted regional Tamil newspaper offices and presented the distorted version of the survey and the attempt to distribute the lands to the IDPs. On the next day when Mr. Sajivan went to the Periya Mathavadi Camp and tried to interfere with the work of the surveyor, the inmates of the camps chased him away and others who went with him. As the rain has ceased, life in the IDP camps are gradually taking a turn to normal, but the roofs urgently need repairs.

117

There is urgent need for aluminum sheets and bags of cement to repair the houses. Also mosquito nets and mats very urgently. I took up their problems with the new Security Forces Commander of Jaffna District Major General Jagath Alwis. He said that he will try to arrange to provide these urgently required items. Major General Jagath Alwis succeeded Major General Uthaya Perera who has become the Director General, General Staff (DGGS) at the Office of the Chief of Defence Staff with effect from 1 December 2014. The new SF Commander Jaffna asked me whether those landless people could be accommodated in condominium like housing arrangements which can benefit many families. He assured that he would most certainly continue with all those projects initiated by his predecessor. “My top most priority is to build harmonious relations between the military and the civilians in the district”, Major General Jagath Alwis told me. IDPS In Jaffna District July 2013

No DS / AGA DIVISION

Living in Welfare Centre Living with Friends & Relatives Total Families Members Families Members Families Members

1 Delft 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 Velanai 0 0 2 4 2 4

3 Kayts 0 0 11 39 11 39 4 karainagar 0 0 18 69 18 69

5 Jaffna 0 0 220 753 220 753

6 Nallur 9 22 580 1882 589 1904 7 Sanidilipay 25 102 548 1954 573 2056

8 Chankanai 0 0 120 394 120 394

9 Uduvil 385 1378 732 2240 1117 3618

10 Tellipalai 344 1184 487 1543 831 2727 11 Kopay 221 895 891 2892 1112 3787

12 Chavakachcheri 0 0 187 696 187 696

13 Karaveddy 16 49 214 780 230 829 14 Pointpedro 229 787 607 2041 836 2828

15 Maruthankerny 0 0 16 26 16 26

Total 1229 4417 4633 15313 5862 19730

118

SUMMARY OF THE OPEN WELFARE CENTERS - As at 31-07-2013

S.N Name of DS Division No of Open Welfare Centres

No of Families No of Members

1 Nallur 1 9 22

2 Sandilipay 4 25 102 3 Uduvil 9 385 1378

4 Tellipalai 6 344 1184

5 Kopay 5 221 895 6 Karaiveddy 2 16 49

7 Point pedro 7 229 787 Total 34 1229 4417

UN RAPPORTEUR CALLS FOR DURABLE SOLUTIONS FOR SRI LANKAN IDPS: UN Special Rapporteur on Internally Displaced Persons Chaloka Beyani urged the Sri Lankan Government to address the problem of IDPs living in protracted displacement, when he addressed the UN Human Rights Council’s 26th Session in Geneva yesterday. Beyani, who visited Sri Lanka in December 2013 welcomed the positive efforts by the Sri Lankan Government to rebuild the infrastructure destroyed during the conflict and the demining in return areas. But post conflict reconstruction and development should also focus on building livelihoods linked to durable solutions for internally displaced persons, the UN Special Rapporteur said. “I also urge the Government to take all necessary steps to address the situation of IDPs living in protracted displacement, as well as those who have returned or settled elsewhere in the north but still live in very precarious conditions and need more durable housing, access to social services, and livelihood opportunities,” Beyani added during his speech to the Council. During his visit to Sri Lanka the UN Special Rapporteur on IDPs visited Jaffna, Kilinochchi and Mullaitivu. In its official response to Beyani’s report following his visit, the Sri Lankan Government took issue with comments made by the UN Rapporteur that welcomed assurances from the Government that that persons, whether officials or private individuals, who contacted him in relation to his official visit pursuant to his mandate, will not as a result be ‘intimidated, threatened, or prosecuted’.

119

The Government in its report to the Council that there were no reports or complaints to that effect and that no person who met Beyani during his visit had been threatened or intimidated. The Government noted that even the Special Rapporteur had acknowledged that Sri Lankan IDPs had shared their experiences with him during his visit even in the presence of security and other officials. “Hence the comment contained in the Report that the Special Rapporteur is unnecessary and unwarranted, and the Government would like to request that this sentence be deleted,” the Government said in its response. FAMILIES SEEK ANSWERS OVER MISSING Annex ‘U’ Families of people reported missing in Puthukkudieruppu (PTK) appeared yesterday and today before the Presidential Commission to record complaints regarding missing persons. The Commission began recording statements in the Mullaitivu District yesterday by conducting hearings at the Puthukkudieruppu Divisional Secretariat and the sittings will later be shifted to the Maritimepattu Divisional Secretariat to record statements tomorrow and on Tuesday. According to reports from Jaffna, nearly 100 people were invited by the Commission to record their statements yesterday and today. Among those who testified before the Commission over the weekend were family members of people reported missing during the final stages of the war in the Mullaitivu District. Many of those who spoke sought answers over the whereabouts of their family members, including some family members of LTTE cadres who had surrendered to the army. One lady told the Commission her husband surrendered to the army during the final stages of the war but he has not been seen or heard of since then. She had told the Commission if the Government was acting with responsibility as it claimed after the war, then it must take the responsibility to hand her husband, who surrendered to the army, back to her safe and sound. Another lady said she is being forced to accept a death certificate for her missing husband, but she has so far refused to do so as she believes he is still alive. CONTINUING DISCRIMINATION AGAINST LANKA’S TEA PLANTATION COMMUNITY Annex ‘V’ What transpired at a recent Colombo workshop on improving the lives of plantation workers was not only startling but in fact showed that archaic laws still prevail to discriminate against the tea plantation community.

120

The workshop “Enhancing the Living Standards and Livelihood Opportunities of the Plantation Community” was held last week at the Sri Lanka Foundation and organized by the Pathfinder Foundation. Speaking on ‘Local Government Services and the Plantation Sector Community’, Rev Fr. Andrew Devadason, Resident Priest, St. Marks Church – Badulla, explained how the plantation community is discriminated and excluded from the country’s mainstream development process entirely, and said, “One point that must be noted and stressed is the historical nature of isolation of the plantation community from the local Government service delivery.” Digging into the roots of discrimination, apathy and virtual slavery enshrined in the law itself, Fr Davadason said that the Village Committees Ordinance No.26 of 1871, the 1937 amendments, the Village Council law No.06 of 1964 (section 93 (C) specifically excluding the plantation community) and the 1980 District Development Councils Act, etc were all formulated with interconnections to the previous laws and with the same bases of exclusion clauses of the plantation communities. Exclusion The 1985 Pradeshiya Sabha (PS) law by itself draws its inspiration from the 1980 DDC and 1964 Village council law. He said that Section 225(2) of No.15 PS law of 1985 states that the sub sections of the no.35, DDC law of 1980 must be taken into account. This means the exclusion of the plantation community becomes legitimized by law. He said that they were discussing about a community (Indian Tamils) that has been neglected for 150 years in Sri Lanka. He emphasized the importance of a holistic approach towards a sustainable development of this abandoned and neglected tea plantation community, a block of nearly one million people or 5.3 per cent of Sri Lanka’s population, and said “local government services must be understood in that light”. It is pathetic, he said, that most of these people live and work as labourers throughout the years, generation after generation. Yet, Fr.Devadason said the country has forgotten that this community has been making a very valuable contribution to the national economy since 1870. The Central Bank, he said, had indicated that the plantation community is below the national average and below the rural sector in most of the socio/economic indicators. He pointed out that the legal barriers may have contributed to the economic retardation of the tea estate community. He said PS’s were established for the explicit purpose of facilitating effective people’s participation in local governance and local development, and though the plantation sector has voting rights these people have no opportunity to participate in the management of local affairs which is a denial of equal rights of a citizen. The whole process leads them to unavoidable poverty, he said. Poverty

121

At question time, M. Yogarajan, Member of Parliament stated that there appeared to be some manipulation with regard to the data concerning plantation sector poverty level. He said that the 2007 figure showed the poverty level as 32 per cent whereas the figure for 2009 has come down to 9 per cent, but this change is not visible in the plantation section. M. Vamadevan, Former Secretary, Ministry of Estate Housing Infrastructure and Community Development in his presentation said that there is a marked difference between national, estate and infant mortality rates. The national mortality rate is 8.5 percent while the estate mortality 15.4 per cent. The national infant mortality rate is 4.5 per cent as against 14.3 per cent on estates, showing the sharp differences. He said housing conditions in the estate sector are deplorable with overcrowding, back to back structures, lack of space and no ventilation. He said that in this sector access to safe water and sanitation is a problem and electricity has not reached everyone. Housing ownership is another issue Ven. Baddegama Samitha Thero, a former MP, speaking on “Plantation Community and Equality” said that while the Americans used Africans as slaves against their will, the British brought Indians and used them as slaves in Sri Lanka in the tea plantation sector and Sri Lanka is one country that still continues this slavery. Malnutrition He said that malnutrition among the children in the estate sector is among the highest and the conditions that prevail in this sector are shameful. He said that a foreign friend of his, an expert on eyes and nutrition, along with him visited an estate and his friend examined the eyes of a group of children there to find almost all the children had bad eyesight. He was concerned to find that the eyesight of one of the children was so bad that the child would eventually go blind. He said that the toilet facilities in that sector are so bad that large numbers of people could be seen queuing up from early morning to take the turn of the single toilet available. He said, “We speak of democracy and human rights. Lots of speakers say one country, one nation. If things happen the way it is, we cannot keep the country in that position. We need to treat everyone equally instead of treating one person better than the other”.This Tamil population was brought from India, Ven. Samitha Thero said, but now they are all Sri Lankans. They work here to develop the country. They have left their religion, left their identity. Bernard Goonetilleke, Chairman, Pathfinder Foundation moderated the workshop and summed up the proceedings. OVER 73,000 PEOPLE IN SRI LANKA ARE SUBJECTED TO MODERN DAY SLAVERY, GLOBAL STUDY FINDS Annex ‘W’ An estimated 73,600 people - 0.359 percent of the entire population of 20.48 million- in Sri Lanka are subjected to modern day slavery, a global report released last week shows.

122

The 2014 Global Slavery Index, released by Walk Free Foundation last week, has ranked Sri Lanka 92nd among 167 countries based on the percent of the country's population that is estimated to be in modern slavery. Sri Lanka placed 14th among 27 countries in Asia Pacific region while neighboring India ranks top most in the region followed by Pakistan, Cambodia and Mongolia. Modern day slavery, which is defined as possession or control of a person that deprives them of their rights with the intention of exploiting them, exists in all 167 countries covered by the index. In 2014, an estimated 35.8 million people are enslaved across the world, according to the report by the Walk Free Foundation, a human rights organization. Almost two-thirds (65.8%) of them are in the Asia Pacific region. Globally, India and Pakistan are ranked fifth and sixth, respectively. Mauritania ranks first in the index with four percent of its almost 4 million people subjected to modern day slavery. This year the Global Slavery Index has also ranked countries based on what actions their governments are taking to end modern slavery. The study has also analyzed the contextual factors that make people vulnerable to modern slavery. This year the Government Response to the modern day slavery in the country received a 'CCC' rating. According to the general characteristics of a country that has received a rating of CCC, the Sri Lankan government has a response to modern slavery, with limited victim support services, a criminal justice framework that criminalizes some forms of modern slavery, has a national action plan and/or national coordination body, and has policies that provide some protections for those vulnerable to modern slavery. There is evidence that some government policies and practices may criminalize and/or deport victims, and/ or facilitate slavery. Services may be largely provided by IOs/NGOs with international funding, with limited government funding or in-kind support. The global reports says that men from Nepal, Sri Lanka and Bangladesh working in the Middle East are in forced labour in the construction industry, while women from the same countries, and the Philippines and Indonesia, have been subject to sexual exploitation and modern slavery in domestic violence. SOME STATE DEPARTMENTS IN TRINCOMALEE BANNED MUSLIM PRAYERS Annex ‘X’ In some government departments in the Trincomalee district, the Muslim employees are banned from performing religious prayers and ceremonies by their higher authorities.

123

Public Administration Circular in this regard permitting the Muslims prayers were already circulated by Home Affairs Ministry to all Secretaries of Provincial Councils, Chief secretaries and Statutory leaders. This clearly indicates the special holidays of Ramadan 2014 entitled in government departments. The government does not see diversity of race, religion, caste and honours all religions equally as one. A circular was made to establish justice and peace to the employees, some how few work against to insult this. From 28th June to 29th July on the eve of Muslims festival, specifically for the Muslim Public Servants, a rule was passed to allow attending and organizing religious prayers rule. Why insulting Muslim employees against that? No matter to what department one belongs or to any high ranking division, religious ceremonies should be accommodated, Tamil and Muslim Youth Association requested. The argument that on Friday there are no people on duty, and hence reinstate the ban on religious worship is regarded as an act of foolishness. The higher authorities should accomodate religious worship. Especially during the time of prayers, fasting and religious rituals on the daily basis, a charter was issued by the Department of Public Administration. From 03.30 am to 06.00 am From 03.15 pm to 04.15 pm From 06.00 pm to 07.00 pm From 07.30 pm to 10.30 pm, to attend religious worship permissions should be granted. During the time of Ramazan month in advance of 14 days, above actions should be taken. Priority should be given to all religion Tamil, Muslim and Sinhala without any diversity by the high ranking officer in the state department, the Youth Muslim Union requested. SRI LANKA UNDERMINING INTERNATIONAL LAW Annex ‘Y’ It is also true that Sri Lanka is not a signatory of the 1951 UN Refugee Convention. However, Sri Lanka cannot legally send refugees back to torture or worse. A Sri Lankan court has granted the government permission to start deporting Pakistani minority refugees from the country, going back on its earlier decision to hold back after Sri Lank cited increases in the disease and crime rate of the country as a result of the influx of refugees. According to the Sri Lankan authorities, the spread of malaria and a jump in the stats of petty crime is forcing their hand. But the Sri Lankan government’s revelation comes months after the initial arrest sprees, in which hundreds of refugees were put behind bars without access to UNHCR representatives or medical aid.

124

Roughly 1800 refugees were seeking shelter in Sri Lanka, with as many as 1500 of them from Pakistan, belonging to minority groups such as Christians, Shia Muslims and members of the Ahmadiyya community, all of them, suppressed, marginalized and attacked, and the last of which have been slaughtered without any pretence ever since they were declared non-Muslims. There is no denying that the increase in refugees in Sri Lanka has been exponential, and the government’s claim of a 700 percent increase might not be too far off the mark. It is also true that Sri Lanka is not a signatory of the 1951 UN Refugee Convention. However, Sri Lanka cannot legally send refugees back to torture or worse. And still, over 108 people have been deported back to Pakistan between August 1st and 14th. Foreign Office Spokesperson, Tasnim Aslam’s despicable statement disowning all those who had left Pakistan without showing even “a trace of shame” at their persecution and the state’s inability to protect them does not mean that the lives of minorities should be trifled with. With both the Sri Lankan and Pakistani government’s indifference, the UNHCR cannot stand by helplessly as it has done on so many occasions. There is a legal basis for the protection of innocent lives that have no homeland. The Sri Lankan government’s assertions should be ignored and the refugees languishing in their prisons must be released and processed in the interests of their most basic human rights. UN EXPERTS TELL LANKA STOP ALL RETURNS: Two United Nations human rights experts today expressed their grave concern at the situation of Pakistani asylum seekers in Sri Lanka who are being detained and forcefully deported to Pakistan without an adequate assessment of their asylum claims. “States must guarantee that every single asylum claim is individually assessed with due process and in line with international law,” stressed the UN Special Rapporteurs on minority issues, Rita Izsák, and on freedom of religion and belief, Heiner Bielefeldt. At least 108 Pakistani citizens have been deported since the beginning of August, according to the UN Refugees Agency (UNHCR). “Most asylum seekers from Pakistan belong to religious minorities, including Ahmadiyya Muslim, Christian and Shia, groups that are often subjected to persecution, discrimination and violence in Pakistan,” Ms. Izsák said. “Many of them are being deported despite being registered with UNHCR and having their first instance interviews still pending.” Violent attacks against religious minorities have increased significantly in recent years, according to Pakistani sources. Last year, 687 persons belonging to religious minorities were reportedly killed in over 200 separate attacks. “Such violence is fueled by existing blasphemy legislation particularly targeting minorities and lack of protective measures for them in Pakistan,” Bielefeldt said. “The personal security and safety of Ahmadiyya Muslims, Christians and Shias who are being returned to Pakistan from Sri Lanka is a matter of serious concern, due to the large number of cases of violent attacks and threats against members of those religious communities by militant extremists in Pakistan,” he highlighted.

125

The UN human rights experts called on the Government of Sri Lanka to comply with the principle of non-refoulement (no-forced-returns) when there is a credible potential threat against an individual and to stop the deportations immediately in order to allow the completion of the entire asylum claim process. “The risks faced by the deportees should never be underestimated but must be adequately assessed” stressed the Special Rapporteurs. “It is our hope that the Government of Sri Lanka will collaborate with the UN Refugees Agency in its work to guarantee the rights of asylum seekers, and avoid any actions that could lead to possible tragic consequences.” THOUSANDS OF WAR-DISABLED LIVE BELOW POVERTY LINE – TNA Annex ‘Z’ Over 7,000 war-disabled persons in the Kilinochchi District undergo great hardship in the absence of a means to earn a living, Kilinochchi District Tamil National Alliance (TNA) Parliamentarian, S. Sritharan, told Ceylon Today yesterday. "These people even lack the means to be self-employed," he added. "Some of these persons live below the poverty line and receive insufficient relief from the authorities. Some of these disabled persons are breadwinners but have no proper means of employment to gain sustenance for themselves. They live in temporary huts with their families," Sritharan claimed. It has been revealed that there are thousands of disabled persons in the secretariat divisions of Karaichi, Kandawalai, Pachilampalli, Poneryn and Kilinochchi. Diaspora communities had given some assistance to these people but that was not enough to even partially sustain 10 families. "The authorities must take immediate action to meet the livelihood needs of these war-affected and disabled persons and their families," he said. Contrarily, Kilinochchi District Secretary, Rupavathy Ketheeswaran said that relief programmes had been carried out for the war-affected and disabled people in the District by the Secretariat. Since there have been complaints in regard to the lack of livelihood facilities, she said, immediate steps will be taken to fulfil such needs.

ISSUES OF TRUTH AND ACCOUNTABILITY Annex ‘AA’ The ‘Third Narrative’ reviewed at the colloquium presents an alternative narrative, of the events of the last stages of the war, and has been developed as a response to the UNHRC resolution of 2014. This is in the wake of the purported conflicting and contradictory accounts of the last stages of the war in Sri Lanka.

126

These varying accounts have come from the Defence authorities/Army and the Government of Sri Lanka, INGOs, university teachers for human rights, academics, documentaries, film clips and publications by individuals, ex-soldiers and combatants, diaspora groups, civil society groups, activists and collectives in and outside Sri Lanka and presentations by the international community, the UN Secretary General’s panel of experts, and the LLRC. This presentation is made following an objective analysis looking forward at the socio economic consequences to flow from the processes now in progress. It is based on a private sector perspective. It has the sole focus of realising the common future goals hopefully shared by all of the alternative view presenters. It further aims to assure that the truth and reconciliation will emerge, along with justice, equity, fairness, upholding the legitimate interests of all victims, the deceased and other local actors including the soldiers who sacrificed their lives and limb in the process of the military operations. It is also developed with an aim to restore the lives and livelihoods of those who suffered on both sides of the war theatre and lead to peace, reconciliation, reparation, restoration lives and livelihoods and alleviate the grievances of those innocent victims and allow loved ones to come to terms and closure with their dead, missing and disappeared family members and friends. The end goal is to ensure sustainable growth and prosperity of the nation and its people, with peace, harmony, good international relations and socio-economic development, equitably benefitting all citizens. This goal has resonance with the private sector’s primary core value of placing the interests of the nation and its people first. The current path and actions of the Government in addressing the international challenges it faces on the accountability for the last stages of the war and its commitments/obligations in terms of international human rights and humanitarian laws, appears to be inimical to the aforesaid core interests and values. These actions appear to be based on an aggressive, arrogant and self righteous stance that ignores the committed to obligations and desired foreign policy framework for effective international relations in the globalised world we live in today. The UN HRC process-led international inquiry is also unlikely to support the common and end goals outlined earlier fully and in a timely manner. The victims and impacted families are unlikely to receive direct benefits from such a process in the short to medium term. Justice for the victims by way of restorative justice or retributive justice cannot also be expected delivered in the short to medium term. With the Sri Lanka Government’s stand of ignoring the UN HRC Resolution of 2014 and taking no part in the inquiry initiated by the Office of the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, and in fact not allowing the inquiry panel even to visit Sri Lanka and further appealing to other nations to follow suit will lead to an acrimonious situation to the ultimate detriment of the nation and its people. The UN Inquiry panel will, irrespective of the stand of the Government of Sri Lanka, continue with its tasks and have planned to receive submissions, hear and gather evidence in designated countries. The Inquiry team will engage in this task, under the guidance of the panel of international advisors recognised globally for their expertise and integrity. UNHRC team will provide an oral brief to the UN HRC during the September session and submit its final report to the March session of the UNHRC in 2015. Thus it will be an exparte inquiry, where Sri Lanka has forfeited an opportunity to present, its voice and advocacy, along with the presentation of any available contradictory evidence.

127

Thus the presentations of the Government and the armed services will not be made available to the inquiry panel, in order to clarify, defend and raise objections to the evidence and submissions before the panel. The opposing views, evidence and negative presentations by other interested parties will most likely be received by the panel, irrespective of the stand of the Government of Sri Lanka. The inquiry process will document these and will guide the outcomes of the inquiry. Such evidence will remain available for access in the years to come, along with the final report to be presented in March 2015. In the event the final report of the panel is inimical to the long term interests of Sri Lanka, Sri Lanka’s international image and international relations will be negatively impacted. In addition the nation and the people may also be negatively impacted, along with any named parties against whom the inquiry findings and strictures are made and classified as parties accused of violation of international law and guilty of offences and crimes against humanity. In such an eventuality the private sector assesses that the under noted economic risks may crystallise, most of them dependent on the contents, gravity and the weight of the purported evidence listed in the report, the findings and recommendations of next steps and any suggested punitive measures highlighted; Banks and finance houses may impose stipulations requiring all documentary credits to be ‘confirmed’ by acceptable first class, designated country, international banks with global credit ratings Downgrading of country risks and associated increases in country specific risk premiums. These actions will impact on cost competitiveness and deter expansion of import export trade transactions Inclusion of ‘Sanctions and Boycott’ clauses in insurance, loan and credit agreements and import export trade and credit documentation Foreign investors, and commercial entities entering with trepidation in to long term trade, service and technology transfer arrangements and agreements with Sri Lankan business Slowing down of foreign direct investments, at a time high growth targets require significant FDI flows, especially in the wake of domestic savings being inadequate to meet supportive investment targets Insecurity led slowing down, significant disinvestment and repatriation of capital from securities listed in the Colombo Stock Exchange International bond holders of Sri Lanka Government Securities (Government Bonds and Treasury Bills) discounting bills in the secondary markets prior to maturity and repatriating capital. If a significant portion of the government securities in issue at present are discounted, the foreign reserves of the country can be significantly eroded and lead to foreign currency reserves available to support future imports being drastically reduced. Such an eventuality can even lead to foreign exchange restrictions being imposed to avert a potential balance of payments crisis. If the UNHRC report were to make specific negative references and raise valid charges accusing the state and/or high officials of continuing post war ethno religious persecution, discrimination and targeting of minorities, (especially the Muslim Community), it may trigger a slowing down of

128

employment opportunities for Sri Lankan expatriates in Middle Eastern countries and even give rise to key trade embargos and boycotts. These actions will significantly impact on the balance of trade and balance of payments of the country. If charges of genocide, war crimes, crimes against humanity and continuing persecution of minorities are raised in the report and accusations are levelled against leaders in governance and the armed services, diaspora groups and other parties, especially those belligerent groups in South India, EU, USA, Canada, Britain, Australia and some middle eastern countries, (i.e. those who have led the voices of advocacy and even legal challenges against the Government) who are against the actions of the authorities, may launch effective advertising and promotional campaigns in key export destinations, calling for the boycott of imports and services Sri Lanka and travel to the country. These campaigns may be similar to previously seen “Boycott goods and services from blood stained nation”. Such campaigns, where successfully implemented, could have disastrous economic consequences. Such campaigns and boycott actions can slow down the growth of tourism, tea, apparel, gems and jewellery, spices, ITC, entrepot and shipping/aviation sectors of Sri Lanka 10. As a consequence of 9 above, the financial media, risk assessors/managers, analysts and rating agencies may impose amber signals in their communications and reports dealing with Sri Lanka 11. As a consequence of 9 above, trade chambers, shipping/aviation, transportation and logistics support service entities and customs, quarantine, inspection and quality control entities in import/export destinations, may discriminate, slow down, impose added conditions and even boycott services support, so essential for effective trade and services transactions. 12. If American and European banks, finance houses and global insurers/re-insurers down grade the country risks and join even in a marginal way in supporting the call of opposing parties as stated in 9 above, this could have disastrous consequences for trade and services credit, documentation, payments and settlements. 13. With a majority of Sri Lanka’s trade transactions being channelled through US-based clearing banks and transacted in dollars, ant slowing down, boycotts and added conditionality by such banks will have significantly negative impact on business. 14. As a consequence of 9 above, visas and travel restrictions may be imposed not only on those accused persons, but also on trade delegations and business persons visiting Sri Lanka as well as overseas. 15. There may even be the imposition of bi-lateral country sanctions and boycotts. 16. The PR image of Sri Lanka as a destination for trade, commerce, services, investment and travel could be tarnished, with long term adverse consequences and possibly lead to classification of Sri Lanka marginally above some of the failed states, in investment, trade and travel friendly states listing international indices. With such risks as those listed above, looming overhead in the external environment is it the time today to; -Take the position that the UN HCR has neither mandate nor a moral right to investigate the human rights issues of the last stages of the war?

129

-Ignore and boycott with arrogance and articulated acrimonious statements, the UN HRC process, already initiated and proceeding for targeted completion -Not defend the country and the armed services by effective diplomacy, advocacy and raising valid objections to unacceptable evidence and submissions before the panel -By words spoken and by actions taken deny/discourage access to the panel and not allow them entry to Sri Lanka, which may further give rise to negative perceptions -Argue that the UN HRC process is illegal and canvass international support to deny access and space for the panel to operate in other countries -Argue about sovereignty of Sri Lanka being violated -To highlight double standards of those leading and supporting the UN HRC Process -To allow an exparte trial, listing of unchallenged evidence and publication of an uncontested report -To remain silent on questions as to why some LTTE leaders are entertained in high political posts and given freedom with protection and unhindered access 10. Deny to family members open access to records, centres of detention and information on processes to confirm the dead and find the disappeared 11. To not effectively support the process of resettlement of Muslims who were chased out by the LTTE many years ago, and 12. To place restrictions on free access to religious sites, and cemeteries but allow new religious and sacred sites to be established for the majority community 13. To ignore the charges of not speedily supporting processes for reparation, restoration of assets, gold, jewellery and bank holdings of families taken over by the LTTE and later recovered by the armed services and the State 14. To not support the processes for effective closure by those with family members grieving over dead, and disappeared 15. To not to provide for truth and justice to be facilitated to the satisfaction of the impacted families 16. To not provide for psycho social support and long term care for the war injured and persons with shrapnel yet implanted in their bodies 17. To not address the purported allegations of land grabs, expanding high security zones, militarisation, civilian administration being dissolved and replaced by military administration, and 18. To ignore charges of failure to provide essential resettlement options for the displaced, and ignore the need for establishing livelihood options, housing , water and sanitation for war impacted families 19. To delay the implementation of an effective power devolution process in the North

130

20. To fail to engage in resolving the ethnic crisis by classifying the conflict as terrorism or a language issue 21. To not effectively engage with the political groups that have gained due recognition following an election in the Northern Province 22. To not have in place an effective long term programs for investment and employment generation, and 23. To not have in place an effective process for rapid restoration of education, training and empowerment, health and in dealing with women’s issues, especially of war widows and single women headed households 24. To not have in place an effective process for repatriation back to Sri Lanka of those living in camps in India and displaced persons in other parts of the island wanting to return to the north 25. Failure to effectively and comprehensively deal with issues raised by the LLRC to be addressed by specific independent investigations as well as its general and specific other recommendations 26. The need to address some of the truth and justice issues raised by the civil society activists and organisations, including issues connected with extra judicial killings, rule of law failures, continuing post war ethno religious hate speech, incidents targeting segments of society and minorities, some of which are openly created by identified members of society, who freely participate in such actions with impunity. 27. To engage the services of professional PR firms at significant costs to canvas and influence opinion leaders/decision makers, whilst ignoring the need to actively participate in the international inquiry process Further is this the time for an ‘Alternative Narrative’ from high intellectual civil society groups; -Where the conflicting and contradictory previous narratives are highlighted -Where the unfortunate and unacceptable procedures driving the previous narratives are highlighted -To define an acceptable definition of a ‘combatant’, a ‘terrorist’, a ‘civilian’, ‘ civilian population’, ‘take direct part in hostilities’ and a ‘No Fire Zone’ in engaging in the number game -To argue on the numbers dead or disappeared in the war against terror, the last stages of the war, once the surrender process commenced and after the war effectively ended with the decimation of the LTTE terrorists -To reflect how the international community had not at any stage contested the strategy leading to the operation to defeat the LTTE and to liberate the land and administration illegally taken over by the LTTE. -To highlight how the international community remained silent in the wake of the Eastern Province liberation war, (i.e. after Mavil Aru) and even provided thereafter tactical and intelligence support and even at times access to necessary military infrastructure and thereafter post the completion of the war, change their attitudes on the last stages of the war. 7. To point out the serious flaws, the validity of the evidence and material used to support the findings in the UN Panel of Experts and IPEC reports.

131

8. To challenge the views opposing the validity of the objectives/planned intent of the government and armed services in conducting operations in the northern theatre in the last stages with the intent of rescuing the civilian hostages, fought on the lines of a humanitarian operation, and classify it not as a rescue operation aimed at minimising civilian casualties, 9. To question the role of the NGOs who operated in the northern front and highlight that evidence dictates that in fact they aided the LTTE and made available tactical material and support to them in waging war, 10. To question the methodology of determining and the specific numbers of dead and disappeared civilian (casualties in excess of 40,000). 11. Highlight the failure to recognise the conditions created by the LTTE in the last stages of the war, that led to the outcomes and call to examine the war crimes created by the LTTE 12. To question the validity of charges of indiscriminate and excessive bombing and targeting of hospitals and no fire zones, without tracking the origins of and sources of intentional acts of the LTTE that preceded and necessitated such action 13. To charge that the panels of under valuing the beneficial role of the armed forces in rescuing civilians, receiving IDPs and surrendering combatants and humane treatment and rehabilitation efforts that followed 14. Highlight that the LLRC did not find valid the allegations of large scale torture rape and sexual violence 15. Stress that the POE report as being a prosecutors brief on war crimes of the Government and armed services 16. Contest the evidence connected with the allegation of intentional denial of food and medicines to civilians trapped in “enemy territory” 17. Point out the failure of the panels to recognise how the war was fought by the LTTE, the atrocities and accountability of the LTTE , the accountability of the international community, UN and its agencies 18. Point out the inadequacy of a genuine and credible process of assessments to determine the proportionality of the Government’s military action 19. Point out the failure to give due emphasis to the LTTE actions in preventing civilians from leaving the conflict zones with the creation of No Fire Zones 20. Canvass the need for changes in IHL, IHRL and R2P doctrine in the face of tactics and strategies adopted by the LTTE -By turning to what the Buddha taught and the Emperor Asoka’s Edicts, is the strategy of the state and civil society in line with what the Thathagatha preached and what ancient emperors practiced, especially;

132

22. ‘Nahi Verani Verani’ as articulated by Sri Lanka post World War II – “Hatreds never cease through hatred in this world; through love alone they cease. This is an eternal law 23. Dammapada Verse 223; conquer anger with love, conquer evil with good, conquer stinginess with giving and conquer lies with the truth. In the wake of the enmity between the Sakhya and Kholi over river water sharing, the Buddha preached ‘value life more than water’ and placed a message that looking beyond the proximate cause and immediate challenges and looking for the cause of the conflict and focusing on the bigger picture will bring lasting beneficial results. In the wake of above and the current strategies not delivering the desired objectives and end goals , can a new path and a strategy be charted by leaders of society caring for the sustainable future of this nation and people, move forward to actively canvass and seek global leaders like the Dalai Lama, Desmond Tutu, Nobel laureate Amarthya Sen and Abdul Kalam along with Justice Weeramantry to bring together all stakeholder, victims, complainants, representatives of diaspora, NGO/I-NGO representatives, UN/UNHRC and the mediate over grievances, accountability issues, reconciliation options, restorative/retributive justice processes required and agree a common non acrimonious processes and find an alternative path to assure what was articulated as objectives at the beginning of this paper.

UN HUMAN RIGHTS COMMITTEE ASKS SL TO REPEAL 18TH AMENDMENT TO CONSTITUTION Annex ‘AB’ Geneva: The United Nations Human Rights Committee, while welcoming several measures taken by the Government of Sri Lanka to ensure human rights of its citizens, asked the government to repeal the 18th Amendment to the Constitution approved by the parliament in September 2010. Presenting the concluding observations on the fifth periodic report of Sri Lanka, the UN human rights treaty body, which reviewed Sri Lanka on 7 and 8 October, said the Committee is concerned by the 18th Amendment to the Sri Lankan Constitution which, inter alia, discontinues the Constitutional Council and empowers the President to dismiss or appoint members of the judiciary and other independent bodies. The Committee asked the Government to take legislative and other measures to ensure transparent and impartial processes for appointments to the judiciary and other independent bodies. It further said the Government should take concrete measures to ensure the protection of members of its judiciary from improper influences, inducements, pressures, threats or interferences, including those of the executive and/or legislature of the State party. Addressing the issue of former combatants, the treaty body noted the measures taken by the Government for the rehabilitation and reintegration of former combatants but said it remains concerned at reports of arbitrary surveillance, torture, detention, enforced disappearances and sexual violence against them.

133

The Committee asked the Government to ensure that former combatants are provided with effective protection against human rights violations, including sexual violence, through the effective application of procedural safeguards and prosecution and punishment of perpetrators of such violations. While noting that the Sri Lankan government has stipulated a ‘zero tolerance’ policy on torture, the Committee said it is concerned about reports of torture and other ill-treatment, including sexual violence, of adults as well as juveniles who are arrested and/or detained. The Committee asked the Government to ensure the prompt, transparent and impartial investigation of any allegation of torture and other ill-treatment by an independent authority that is not connected to the prosecution of the alleged victim. The Committee also observed that the Sri Lankan government should strengthen its efforts to guarantee de jure and de facto equality between men and women and undertake measures to raise awareness on women’s rights. The UN treaty body also asked the Government to ensure that all members of ethnic, religious and linguistic minorities enjoy effective protection against discrimination and are able to enjoy their own religion, language and culture, and able to participate in public affairs. Addressing freedom of expression and participation in the political process, the Committee expressed concern at widespread reports of intimidation and harassment, including physical attacks, death threats, administrative detention and politically motivated charges, against journalists, lawyers, clergymen, NGO workers and human rights defenders, by State officials. The Committee said the Government should refrain from any measures amounting to intimidation or harassment taken against persons exercising the right to freedom of expression. “Furthermore, it should ensure that any individual or organisation can freely provide information to the Committee and protect them against any reprisals for providing such information,” the rights committee said. The Sri Lankan Government is required to provide, within one year, relevant information on its implementation of the Committee’s recommendations made regarding constitutional, legal framework and independence of judiciary, right to life, enforced disappearances and freedom of expression and participation in the political process. DELEGATING LAND AND POLICE POWERS WITHOUT FACILITATING SEPARATISM Annex ‘AC’ After the meeting the President had with the new Prime Minister of India, once again the talk of delegation of police and land powers to the provincial councils is doing the rounds. The need and also the motives of people demanding delegation of such powers in a small country like Sri Lanka are debatable. However, the current situation may require finding a middle ground.

134

Considering the activities of the Tamil Nadu Government and the separatist diaspora, delegating full police powers, especially to the Northern Provincial Council, could end up with rejuvenating separatism. Rather than hiding the reasons, the Government should bring these concerns into the open. Thereafter, with the concurrence of all Provincial Councils, certain civilian duties of the police that cannot be used for separatist activities should be delegated to the provinces. A similar hybrid solution should be considered for land powers as well. Policing activities Civilian police duties such as traffic management, domestic disputes, women and child abuse cases, minor robbery, minor assault complaints, crowd management, minor fraud cases, etc., are activities than can be delegated to a provincial police force. Having or use of arms is not required to carry out these duties. Hence the provincial police stations will be similar to pre-1971 where few or no arms were used in policing activities. The federal police or armed forces should intervene in the cases of civil unrest with or without the request of the provincial police. “Considering the activities of the Tamil Nadu Government and the separatist diaspora, delegating full police powers, especially to the Northern Provincial Council, could end up with rejuvenating separatism. Rather than hiding the reasons, the Government should bring these concerns into the open. Thereafter, with the concurrence of all Provincial Councils, certain civilian duties of the police that cannot be used for separatist activities should be delegated to the provinces. A similar hybrid solution should be considered for land powers as well” Other cases such as armed robbery, terrorism related cases, narcotics, VIP security, etc., should be kept with the central police department that will have to establish sufficient presence in the provinces. The responsibilities of the provincial police and the federal police should be clearly documented. A central unit comprising the senior officers of federal police and representatives of provincial police (departments of all provinces) should handle the disputes and their determinations should be the final. Land powers With regard to land powers, a part of the State land in a province could be leased to the provincial councils, to be used for development activities that benefit the public in general. The central government will remain the absolute owner of all State land. An approved list could be introduced stating uses of leased land. By this list the use of leased owned provincial lands should limited to activities of general benefit such as agriculture, education, irrigation, utilities such as electricity and water, roads, etc.

135

The provincial council could be authorised to sublease the land for other development purposes for periods not exceeding 20 years but only with the concurrence of the absolute owner (the central government). The central government should retain the right of re-acquisition (cancelling lease to the PC) of the lands that it suspects are being used for a detrimental activity such as terrorism or environmentally-harmful activities, etc. Most importantly, the centre should retain the right to suspend the civilian police and land leases in the cases of another bout of separatism or such activity. For public good Naturally the people with a separatist mindset will continue to demand a pound of flesh stating that the ownership of the land should be completely vested in the PCs. Similarly they will demand that full police powers should be delegated. The government should openly state the reasons for the inability of doing that considering separatism. At the same time the government should point out that if the demand for devolution is for public good, what is important is to have the authority to put the land to the public benefit rather than who has the absolute ownership. 13TH CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT IS DEEPLY FLAWED BUT THERE CAN BE NO QUESTION OF ROLLING IT BACK Annex ‘AD’ (Text of a presentation by Prof Rajiva Wijesinha M.P. at the international seminar held on November 6th and 7th 2014 on “An Appraisal of India’s Neighbourhood Policy: Way Forward“at the Maulana Abul Kalam Azad Institute of Asian Studies, Kolkata.India) In the period leading up to the victory over the terrorist Tigers of Tamil Eeelam in 2009, India and Sri Lanka enjoyed an excellent relationship. It was clear that, despite the opposition of politicians in Tamilnadu, India was supportive of the military initiatives of the Sri Lankan government. More importantly, it assisted Sri Lanka in dealing effectively with the efforts of some Western countries to stop the Sri Lankan offensive, and then to condemn it after the military success of May 2009. This was most obvious in Geneva, where the Indian Permanent Representative, together with his Pakistani counterpart, comprised the negotiating team that accompanied the Sri Lankan Permanent Representative, Dr Dayan Jayatilleka, into discussions with Western nations that had wanted a resolution critical of Sri Lanka.

136

Since then the relationship deteriorated. In 2012 India voted in favour of a resolution put forward by the United States that was strongly critical of the Sri Lankan government. And though much aid and assistance was given to Sri Lanka for reconstruction after the war, India seems to feel that this is not properly appreciated – as evinced by recent remarks by the Indian High Commissioner. Conversely, a response to his speech in a Sri Lankan newspaper displays even great angst, culminating in the complaint that ‘In the more recent past, India repeatedly voted against Sri Lanka at the UNHRC in Geneva whereas in view of India’s domestic political constraints, all India had to do was abstain which Sri Lanka would have appreciated immensely.’ Before that there had been a catalogue of the support offered in the eighties by India to terrorist movements in India. That support is a fact, and India must recognize not only the damage done to Sri Lanka by its support for terrorists in the eighties, but also the continuing exploitation of that support by forces in Sri Lanka that I would describe as racist. But Sri Lanka too must recognize that those actions were committed thirty years ago, and also that there were reasons for India to behave as it did. Though I think it is important to affirm the moral principle that assistance to terrorists is totally beyond the pale, we have to understand that India felt threatened at the time by the hostility evinced by the United States during the Cold War period. When the government of President J R Jayewardene abandoned Sri Lanka’s traditional policies of Non-Alignment and close understanding with India, to the extent of offering facilities in Sri Lanka to a country that made no secret that India was the principal target of its military adventurism in the Indian Ocean, India reacted aggressively. As your current Deputy National Security Adviser, Mr Gupta, put it succinctly, though such a response was not justifiable, it was understandable. This was in the context of an attempt by one of his subordinates at the Institute of Defence and Strategic Analysis to defend Indian support for terrorists. I appreciated Mr Gupta’s forthrightness at the time, and I believe this should be shared by Indian analysts of the current relationship. At the same time it is even more important that Sri Lankan analysts, such as they are because we do not have a tradition of intellectual rigidity, recognize the seminal damage done to the relationship by the adventurism of the then Sri Lankan government. The current Sri Lankan government must also recognize that today, thirty years later, India might be worried by what seems total commitment to China. I do not think this is what China wants, and I do not think any serious thinker in Sri Lanka would argue that the relationship with China must be developed with no regard for Indian sensitivities. But sadly Sri Lanka currently has no coherent foreign policy, and the practices and pronouncements of many of those in positions of influence create the impression that we are putting all our eggs into the China basket. This impression is fuelled by the United States, ironically so, given that in the eighties it saw China as a tool to be used against its great enemy at the time, the Soviet Union, with which India was closely allied. Jayewardene was foolish in the eighties to assume that the United States would take on India in support of Sri Lanka if hostilities developed. But given the oppositional approach of the West at the time, his optimism is not entirely incomprehensible. Now however, given China’s clear advice that India should not be alienated, our leaders have no excuse for their myopia. But given the greed of those who wish to do business for profit, and the

137

understandable determination of Chinese companies to do business where profits can be maximized, we are in grave danger of sacrificing our sovereignty. In the eighties, India was worried about what seemed the determination of the Jayewardene government to allow the United States even military use of Trincomalee, whilst also giving broadcasting facilities to the Voice of America. Now, the sheer stupidity of those who have handed over ownership of prime land to foreign business interests, whilst merrily mortgaging assets for years to come, naturally rouses suspicions. The recent inconsistencies with regard to alienation of land suggest that Sri Lanka is a victim of its own internal confusions, rather than deliberate policy, but the adverse impact of incoherence is no less real. This I think underlines High Commissioner Sinha’s recording of the grants India has given, which are not publicized much, whereas Chinese assistance, most of it in the form of loans, is presented as arising from goodwill alone. Yet India should realize that expressions of gratitude are also in line with the perception that China has never let us down internationally, whereas India has sided with those who have made no secret of their opposition to our victory over terrorism. In the next section of this paper I will look at the political compulsions that led to the Indian vote going against us in 2012 and 2013 in Geneva. Though I believe India was wrong to ally itself with those it had helped defeat in 2009, there were reasons for the vote which Sri Lanka must examine, with a view to doing more to help India help us in the future. But before moving on to that, let me stress the need to better bind India and Sri Lanka together economically too, a process that can only be of mutual benefit. A major problem is this regard is that the Free Trade agreement that was prepared some years back has not as yet been signed. Problems arose when some Sri Lankan investors felt hard done by because of adverse rulings by state officials in terms of the previous less comprehensive agreement. Though obviously the suspicions that arose require more careful analysis, I cannot help feeling that greater sensitivity on the part of India with regard to interpretation would have helped to reduce suspicions that Sri Lanka, a naturally much weaker state economically, was being exploited. Though the worries of Sri Lankan businessmen should be assuaged, I should note that the major impediment to both the Free Trade Agreement, and better political understanding, is the hostility to India felt by a few officials in Sri Lanka. The most extreme of these is now our Foreign Secretary, who tried in 2012 to set the President against your current Foreign Minister. The President wanted, after he had been told by her that Mrs Sushma Swaraj, as Head of a Parliamentary delegation to Sri Lanka, had been negative about him, to cancel a scheduled meeting. Though the Secretary to the President averted this potential disaster, there was no follow up action, and I fear the tendency to make relations with India worse has continued. Thus we have not only failed to live up to commitments made to India, but these have been repudiated when enunciated by Indian officials. In 2012 there was no response to a letter seeking clarification, sent by the Indian Prime Minister. At the same time Sri Lanka ignored a request by India not to publicize a commitment to support us in Geneva, and Sri Lanka has failed to investigate the blunder on our part and its impact on Indian policy, satisfying itself rather with blaming India for changing its stance.

138

We seem out of touch with reality, and I feel that this is as much a result of policy on the part of individuals as of a lack of professionalism, inasmuch as Sri Lankan officials who have tried to report the actual situation in Delhi believe that what they say does not get through to the President. Indeed, even recently, there were bland communiqués about what transpired at meetings between the President and the new Indian Prime Minister, and there is no capacity to analyse interactions and work out how best to proceed to strengthen the relationship. So the very clear message given by the new Indian Prime Minister, when he met our President at his inauguration, and more recently in New York, is not taken seriously. To my mind India has consistently asked for implementation of the 13th Amendment to the Constitution, which came about as a result of the Indo-Lankan Accord of 1987. Though the newspaper article I mentioned refers to that Amendment as an imposition by India, Sri Lanka must acknowledge that it has been part of our Constitution for over quarter of a century, and our present President has pledged its full implementation, and indeed has indicated that he is prepared to go further. My own view is that the 13th Amendment is deeply flawed, but there can be no question of rolling it back. Indeed I would agree that we need to go further in terms of devolution, since it is clear that government needs to improve mechanisms for consultation of the people and providing better responses to their needs. However I can also see that devolution should not impinge on national security, and this is an even more important consideration now than in the eighties, given the trend in recent years to split up countries. To put it bluntly, whereas until the eighties Federalism was a system to bind countries together whilst allowing for different priorities in different component sections, now Federalism seems a way of entrenching internal boundaries that can then turn into international ones. I should note that India too is well aware of this tendency, and recognizes the need to guard against this. Obviously it would make sense for our two countries to work together in this regard, and I hope we can overcome current suspicions and promote cooperation, given that we could both become victims of the current simplistic solution, of bifurcation for all differences, which is now employed by dominant forces in the international community. In this regard the biggest blunder in the Indo-Lankan Accord, which the Liberal Party pointed out in 1987 even while welcoming the commitment to devolution, was the possible merger of the Northern and the Eastern Provinces. That immediately changed devolution from a system to bring government closer to the people to a mechanism for entrenching the idea of different ‘homelands’. The merger, which was accomplished through sleight of hand by President Jayewardene, was dissolved by the Courts a few years ago. At the time President Mahinda Rajapaksa expressed his willingness, since the danger of separatism seemed averted, to devolve all powers enjoined by the Constitution, including police ones. My own view is that, following the victory over the LTTE in 2009, he should have proceeded with this. I gather that the Secretary of Defence, who is now seen as a hardliner opposed to devolution, was then in favour of this. However subsequent events have created tremendous diffidence, so there is need of concerted effort now to overcome this, to ensure Sri Lanka fulfils its commitments whilst also creating confidence that separatist machinations will not revive, and revive with them the sufferings of the last few decades.

139

In this regard I believe India should make it crystal clear, whilst promoting the constitutional provisions agreed upon in the interests of greater responsiveness to people’s needs, that the merger must be forgotten. And it should also encourage government to empower people more fully (the 13 plus that the President of Sri Lanka pledged, on his own) through greater powers to local government bodies. After all, when the Indo-Lankan Accord was signed, India had not introduced the Panchayat system. Developing a similar system in Sri Lanka, with greater accountability in small units that will take care of basic needs, will overcome the neglect endemic in excessive centralization, whilst also avoiding similar neglect by Provincial administrations that have limited understanding of local issues and problems. At the same time India should encourage the Sri Lankan government to move on reforms that present no threat. Unfortunately there is a general tendency to view constitutional reform as a package, with agreement on and implementation of reforms in some areas to be avoided since that could lead to complacence so that other reforms will be forgotten. But the positive impact of say a Second Chamber of Parliament, where the Provinces could have a greater say in National issues, would be tremendous. So too a reduction in the size of the Cabinet would reduce the tendency to entrench all decision making at the Centre, given that an excess of Ministers means an excess of petty Caesars who cannot let well alone. It is obviously the responsibility of Sri Lanka to move on political reform, and the failure to think about the issues I have mentioned above is culpable. But India must also realize the limitations Sri Lanka had imposed on itself by excessive politicization of all aspects of society. The education system has been moribund for years, satisfied with good statistics as to basic education which we have had for decades, in contrast to the rest of South Asia: we have therefore ignored the fact that we have fallen back in Science and Technology, and also in the capacity to assess political and social realities and plan and put through essential reforms. To put it bluntly, Sri Lanka has no think tanks, except for the Institute of Policy Studies, the exception that proves the rule. Unfortunately its expertise is in the field of economics. Though it has done yeoman service with regard to promoting more enlightened trade policies, the absence of a political equivalent has meant that the socio-political arguments for reform have no traction. And sadly Sri Lanka has practically canonized the idea that planning is a luxury that a country in need of rapid development cannot afford. Despite an excellent paper from the Secretary to the Ministry of Policy Planning and Implementation, sent in late 2009 to the Secretary to the President, suggesting an enhanced role for that Ministry, it was abolished after the election of April 2010. So, as in the field of Human Rights, another Ministry that was abolished, its tasks being entrusted to the Ministry of External Affairs which had neither capacity nor inclination to promote such Rights, we were reduced to lurching from crisis to crisis – a massive airport that has no scheduled flights, excellent connectivity in the North with no corresponding development of Human Resources to take advantage of the infrastructure that had been developed, an excellent Rehabilitation programme for former Combatants with no policy or coherent programmes for Reintegration. I have long suggested therefore that India should provide support for thinking about Sri Lankan issues. I have suggested to the High Commissioner that he should convene meetings of Sri Lankan Ministers responsible for service delivery, to discuss structural changes that would enhance responsiveness to local needs. The UN has commissioned an excellent paper from a retired Sri Lankan official but there seems little interest in taking

140

things forward. A spur to executive action is needed, but given the top heavy nature of decision making in Sri Lanka, and the excessive responsibilities, which preclude innovation, of the few key officials who make decisions, this will have to come from outside. I do not mean by this either intervention or imposition. But allowing innate Sri Lankan abilities and ideas to function more freely does require opportunities for discussion and interaction, and also the injection of awareness of best practices elsewhere. India, which like us moved from statism and socialism to a mixed economy, managed to avoid the crony capitalism that we allowed to develop in the eighties, and which is now stifling equitable development in Sri Lanka. India also established centres of educational excellence, and never abandoned English medium education so that its capacity to interact on equal terms with the world has increased, whereas ours has declined steadily over the last few decades. India has helped in some of these areas, but it has done so only through state to state interventions, which have not been productive. I would submit then that India needs to help us think outside the box. A few workshops that involve Sri Lankan decision makers as well as thinkers could lead to position papers that will help government move on reforms. A blueprint could be produced for educational support, that goes beyond the present training of English teachers who then have no impact on the system. There should be guidelines to promote Indian investment that will also lead to technology transfers and training, so that our human resources can develop. And above all there should be a blueprint for devolution that will satisfy as many desires as possible whilst ensuring that concerns are taken care of and no elements should feel insecure. This latter will not be difficult to achieve, and is more important than satisfying desires, which will have to be limited by the fears that naturally are felt still by all those involved in the decades long conflict. WHAT ARE THE RIGHTS CONSTITUTIONALLY & LEGALLY DENIED TO TAMILS IN SRI LANKA? Annex AE’ Mr. Venkaiah Naidu, BJP Union Minister for Urban Development and Parliamentary Affairs has declared that Sri Lanka should give equal rights to Tamils. Does this imply that Tamils do not enjoy equal rights, or perhaps that is the perception? If Sri Lanka’s closest neighbour thinks Tamils do not enjoy equal rights we can’t blame others for the same perceptions. The statement does mean that Sri Lanka has failed to project what Tamils and minorities actually enjoy in Sri Lanka. Sri Lanka has also failed to statistically show that in many ways the minorities are economically and socially placed above the majority Sinhalese Buddhists of Sri Lanka. Those that are under the impression that Tamils do not enjoy rights constitutionally and legally need to first look at the Constitution which clearly sets out fundamental rights. There is no word in the constitution that denies Tamils or minorities equal rights. The foremost place afforded to Buddhism cannot be challenged because Buddhism was the state religion chosen by royalty and that status changed only upon colonial invasion and occupation though the colonial invaders assured that they would not depose the place afforded to Buddhism in Sri Lanka passed down from King to the next (a promise the British didn’t mean to keep, but nevertheless is important on the context of the historical status that Buddhism held and should continue to hold).

141

In a population of 20m there are less than 2.2m Tamils and less than 1.6m Muslims in Sri Lanka as against 14.8m Sinhalese. Those that place their arguments must realize that 7 out of 10 in Sri Lanka are Sinhalese, the country has been ruled by over 180 Sinhala Buddhist kings that status only changed because Sri Lanka was taken over. Those that invaded and occupied Sri Lanka brought workers from Tamil Nadu and before independence these Tamils numbered more than the Tamils that had settled down following various South Indian invasions throughout history. This was one ground that these settled immigrant Tamil politicians desired the Tamil Nadu labor Tamils to be sent back and the pacts signed between Indian and Sri Lankan leaders gave the choice of remaining in Sri Lanka or returning to India. In responding to the question of rights the world needs to look from the lens of what people currently enjoy and not what Tamil politicians are demanding for themselves. Let us therefore stick the most basic of questions Are Tamil pregnant mothers denied entry to State hospitals to deliver their baby because they are Tamil? NO Are Tamil patients denied State doctors and nurse care because they are Tamil? NO Are Tamils denied admission to State schools because they are Tamil? NO Are Tamils given less marks because they are Tamil? NO Are Tamils denied State scholarships because they are Tamil? NO Are Tamils denied employment in State sector because they are Tamil? NO Are Tamils not allowed to travel in public buses because they are Tamil? NO Are Tamils given separate seats in public places because they are Tamil? NO Are Tamils made to stand in separate queues because they are Tamil? NO Are Tamils denied right of freedom to travel throughout the country? NO Are Tamils denied right of residence because they are Tamil? NO Are Tamils denied right to worship because they are Tamil? NO Are Tamils denied burial/crematorium rights because they are Tamil? NO Will public or private entities refuse or deny to serve a Tamil because they are Tamil? NO Will parcels, letters and postcards not be accepted or delivered because people are Tamil? NO Are there separate areas for Tamils? NO Have Tamils being terminated from service because they were Tamil? NO The examples we can give are many and this list will be quite a long one. Nevertheless, there is also the need to look at the reciprocity. While Tamils can live, buy property, indulge in business, educate their children throughout Sri Lanka even in the South of Sri Lanka where most Tamils now live and have lived, do Tamils and in particular Tamil politicians want Sinhalese to live in the North? NO. How fair is this behaviour from those demanding equal rights?

142

While Tamils buy property, build houses/flats etc are people aware that the majority of them sell or rent/lease only to Tamils? NO. How fair is this behaviour from those demanding equal rights? While Tamils own businesses and the wholesale market is virtually run by the minorities in Sri Lanka as are most coated companies why are Sinhalese not allowed to run businesses in the North and everyone together shouts ‘colonization’. People seem to have forgotten that Sinhalese were living in the North evidence of which can be proved by the architectural/archaeological remains as well as the fact that all bakeries in the North were run by the Sinhalese. Today, in the commercial capital of Colombo the Sinhalese are a minority and the Tamils and Muslims make up the majority. This gives the minorities access to all the leaders with ease and thus able to get their ways through any other means! Go through areas of Kotahena, Wellawatte, Dehiwela to see and people will be surprised to see how the Maldivians have taken over entire parts of Dehiwela/Mt Lavinia too! How many job adverts purposely omit Sinhalese by declaring that Tamil is a must (these are all NGO/INGO jobs/projects) discriminating Sinhalese from applying and getting the job. Very few speak about reversing the discrimination not looking at what the Sinhalese had been denied right through invasion and occupation and thereafter when colonial sub-servients were created to take reigns and little have post-independence leaders done to undo the injustices meted out to the Sinhalese when even by 1956 (8 years after independence) Tamils held over 75% jobs in the public service. With the BJP Union Minister demanding equal rights for Tamils, it is good to ask what place India gives to Tamil Nadu Tamils when out of the 74million Tamils in the world 67million Tamils live in Tamil Nadu? Give us an example where when 7 out of 10 people belong to one race/ethnicity and religion what other country has given just 1% equal language status as Sri Lanka has done? Rightly, there should be only one national language and English as the link language. If Sinhalese is the official national language it means that every citizen must know Sinhalese. Do not Tamils have to learn German to live in Germany, French to live in France and Japanese to live in Japan? One language and English bridges people. Two languages are dividing people While Tamil is an official language in Sri Lanka (which has less than 2.2m Tamils against 14.8m Sinhalese), let us remind India that Tamil is not an official language in India though it is an official language in Tamil Nadu state. It is good to recall BJP’s Tarun Vijay demanding national status for Tamil. It was in 2014 that Jayalalitha opposed the UGC circular on Hindi in Tamil Nadu universities Sri Lanka has a separate color to depict Tamils and Muslims in the country’s national flag – has India shown such a gesture when it has 9/10 of the world’s Tamils in India? Let us also remind India that in Tamil Nadu – close to 20% of its population are Dalits and 80% of this number live in villages where illiteracy is over 60%. 62% of these Dalits suffer from some type of abuse ranging from physical assault, sexual harassment, verbal abuse to even rape. This is how Tamils appear to be treating their own in India where the Indian Government is telling Sri Lanka to treat Tamils with dignity and respect”.

143

Let us remind India that even in the Madras High Court, the language of the court is NOT Tamil but Hindi! Therefore, it is advisable for people to accuse after having investigated for themselves whether Tamils have any rights denied to them which ONLY Sinhalese enjoy. To claim that a right is denied they first have to prove that the Sinhalese are enjoying what Tamils are denied to enjoy constitutionally, legally and legislatively. So far every time Tamil politicians begin their mourning about rights being denied when they are asked to name them they are unable to do so. Let it also be reminded that those that believe the TNA need to realize that the TNA and LTTE are one and the same and this was told by none other than John Cushnahan EU monitoring mission’s head in 2004 and we can’t disagree with him on that assessment. What needs to be clearly asked is where in this world can people be given everything they want or aspire. In the case of Sri Lanka anyone who wishes to say that Tamils or minorities have no rights must first prove that the right they say they can’t enjoy is enjoyed only by the Sinhalese. As things stand the minorities enjoy far more rights than the majority. Let us also remind readers that for Sinhalese this is the ONLY country they have. The Tamils have Tamil Nadu where 9/10 Tamils live – they can go to Tamil Nadu. The Sri Lankan Muslims have the Middle East – they can any time be welcome in the Middle East. The Sri Lankan Christians/Catholics have the West and Vatican – they too will anytime welcome them. Where does that leave the Sinhalese Buddhists? Who will accept the Sinhalese Buddhists? – they only have Sri Lanka and that is why they want to protect it and they should protect it and why they have every right to protect it, but in so protecting they have not denied any others their right to live in Sri Lanka. All that they ask in exchange for these equal rights is for them not to try to make Sri Lanka lose its historical/cultural Buddhist identity. These aspects must be on everyone’s minds when making accusations because politicians only use them as slogans for political mileage and personal benefits. OHCHR INVESTIGATION ON SRI LANKA WILL CONTINUE TO SEEK ENGAGEMENT WITH THE GOVERNMENT Annex ‘AF’ The international investigation on Sri Lanka that will be conducted by the United Nations Office of the High Commission for Human Rights (OHCHR) as mandated by the UN Human Rights Council has officially begun in Geneva. The Council has requested the High Commissioner to present an oral update on the investigation at its 27th session and a comprehensive report on the investigations at its 28th session and in accordance with this mandate, the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights Navi Pillay has established the OHCHR Investigation on Sri Lanka (OISL), based in Geneva. According to the final framework and investigation methodology to proceed with its operations agreed by the OHCHR and made public Monday, the OISL will probe the period from 21 February 2002 until 15 November 2011, the period covered by the Lessons Learnt and Reconciliation Commission (LLRC), from the day the ceasefire agreement was signed to the day LLRC presented its report to the President.

144

The OISL will also take into consideration any contextual and other relevant information that may fall outside this timeframe which may provide a better understanding of events or which may be pertinent regarding continuing human rights violations. The mandate of the OISL requires it to undertake investigations into alleged serious violations and abuses of human rights and related crimes by both parties to the conflict. The legal framework is the same as applied by the Lessons Learnt and Reconciliation Commission. The OISL is required to apply international criminal law to the incidents and events under investigation in determining whether crimes have been perpetrated. As required by the Council resolution, the OISL will also obtain the assistance of specific special procedures mandate holders including on extrajudicial executions, disappearances, internally displaced persons, arbitrary detentions, violence against women and torture. In order to establish the facts and circumstances of alleged violations, abuses and crimes by both parties, the OISL will -conduct a desk review of existing documents and information, including government and civil society reports, -collect and document victims' testimonies and the accounts of survivors, witnesses and alleged perpetrators, -seek information from other relevant sources such as satellite images, authenticated video and photographic material and official documents. In analyzing the information collected, it will seek to corroborate facts and accounts to meet the agreed standard of proof. The OISL will continue to seek to engage with the Government of Sri Lanka, as envisioned in the Council resolution. The High Commissioner will continue to request for the OISL to have access to the country to meet with Government officials and others, as well as to have access to all relevant documentation. The OISL will seek to develop regular dialogue and cooperation with other United Nations entities, including its specialized agencies, interested institutions and academics and non-governmental and community organizations. Any state, individual or organization may submit information in writing to the OISL. Submissions to the OISL may be sent to: oisl_submissions@ohchr.org. The OISL assures to take appropriate steps to address witness and victim protection concerns and will adopt procedures and methods of work aimed at protecting such persons during all stages of its work. The OISL reminds that the government also has an obligation to protect victims and witnesses and others in Sri Lanka who make contact with the OISL, and requests the government to ensure that no one will suffer harassment, threats, acts of intimidation, ill-treatment or reprisals as a result of contact with OISL.

145

The OISL assures that it will take all necessary measures and precautions to protect the confidentiality of information, including by not disclosing the names of individuals in its public reports as appropriate. At the end of its work, the OISL will archive all its confidential material in accordance with standard UN procedures for strictly confidential material. DEEPAK OBHRAI: SAYS “TAMILS FACES DISCRIMINATION IN SRI LANKA Annex ‘AG’ Hon. Deepak Obhrai, MP, PC Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Foreign Affairs, House of Commons, Ottawa. Dear Deepak: Your statement in parliament in response to the Tamil Tiger sympathizer, the rookie Tamil MP for Scarborough-Rouge River, Rathika Sitsabaiesan’s comment in parliament offending Canada’s Veterans by equating their Remembrance Day with her Tamil Tiger Heroes Day, you said …there was no denying ethnic Tamils faces discrimination in Sri Lanka, but you can’t compare Remembrance Day to Tamil Heroes Day.” That got my goat. After 30 years of my involvement on the Canadian-Snow Tigers file I retired from the issue on August 4, 2013. With that God damn lie of yours, Deepak you nudged me back, however temporarily, to deal with your stupidity trying to colour my Motherland, Sri Lanka black, that I am still romancing with after leaving the island 58 years ago. No way Hozay! That comment of mine applies to all you Canadian parliamentarians who relish playing with Canadian Tamil Tiger cubs and feeding them with baby bottles of Bison milk to provide them with vitamins to sustain their cause and funding to carve out the best chunk of real estate off that puny island nation for their mono-ethnic, racist, Tamil separatist state Eelam. Let me identify your problem, Deepak. You speak with too many Canadian-Tamil Tiger cubs and not enough with honest Sinhalese-Canadians. And inhaling too much of Jaffna Roasted Curry Powder meat curries is not good for your faculties of comprehension and honesty. Less consulting with Tamil-Canadian Tamil Tiger Cubs and more with Sinhalese-Canadians will do you a world of good and repair your degenerating faculties of comprehension when dealing with Sri Lanka. Your memory is short Deepak. At 64 you are too young to lose your long term memory. Remember, what we did to the FLQ terrorist uprising for their separatist cause on October 16, 1970? These FLQ terrorists killed Quebec’s Labour Minister, Pierre Laporte and kidnapped James Cross the British Trade Attaché, and the War Measures Act was evoked and we saw military helicopters buzzing like monster mosquitoes over the Ottawa skies, and every street corner in Ottawa, Montreal and Quebec City was lined up with soldiers with assault rifles on the draw to shoot at belligerent French separatists. When Sri Lanka went after the Tamil Tiger terrorists, the most ruthless in the world, who not just killed one or two but thousands of innocent Sinhalese, Muslims and their own Tamils, and India’s Rajiv Gandhi and Sri Lanka’s President Premadasa, You, and Prime Minister Stephen Harper, John Baird, Jason Kenney, Lynne Yelich, Patrick Brown, Paul Calandra and others lined up with baby bottles filled with Bison milk to feed the Canadian Snow Tiger cubs to sustain them. And that is sick, Deepak. And one result of that stupidity was Rathika standing up

146

in the House Chambers and insulting our Veterans. You bet, there will be more of those misguided comments coming in the House in the future by Tamil Tiger terrorist sympathizers. To be honest Deepak, thinking back, I, must be having a hole in my head, to think that Minister Deepak Obhrai is an honourable man, when this is the guy who took a chance of getting kicked out from Sri Lanka during the Commonwealth Summit in Colombo, when he acted like a Canadian High School Bully resisting a Sri Lankan official when he told this Canadian parliamentarian not to, and yet performed a well orchestrated with photographers tagging along laid a wreath with a banner printed with Tamil script on the sands of Elephant Pass in memory of the dead Tamil Tigers of the Eelam war, but not for others who died defending their Motherland. When challenged this Canadian parliamentarian told us that he laid the wreath on neutral ground, when he could have picked one from thousands of other neutral nooks all over in Sri Lanka. But this Canadian parliamentarian figured out that Elephant Pass was neutral enough for Canada’s Conservative Government, where there were three raging battles fought between Tamil Tigers and the Government forces. The First battle was fought between July 10 and August 9, 1991, and the Sri Lankan Army was victorious. The Second battle was from 22 to 23 April, 2000, and the Tamil Tigers decimated the Sri Lankan army. And the Tamil Tigers held on to Elephant Pass then on until the Third battle of January 9, 2009, when their butts were whipped on the way to their demise on May 19, 2009. Deepak, tuck that bit of information at the back of your mind, and recall them before you look dumb saying that Elephant Pass was a neutral site to lay your Canadian Conservative Government wreath for the Tamil Tigers who died at battle. Neutral, my foot, Deepak! You must be a joker. I hope you recall what happened on July 24th, 1967, when French President Charles De Gaulle ended his speech on the balcony of Montreal’s City Hall with a salute Vivre le Quebec, Libre!” That extraordinary statement made him get into his military jet on July 26, panicking sweating under his pants and vanished through the Quebec clouds in the Canadian skies as the Canadian Prime Minister Lester B. Pearson didn’t want him in Canada. And Deepak, if I had a say on your wreath laying orchestrated shenanigan at Elephant Pass, a signature to anchor Tamil votes for the Conservatives at the next federal election, I would have asked you to buggeroff from Sri Lanka too, tout suite.! Being a Canadian parliamentarian wouldn’t have mattered a tuppence to me, nor the diplomatic niceties. Since I will tell you loud and clearly, that Tamils have been the ‘privileged minority’ all along, and the Sinhalese have been the wronged majority”, the crunch time has arrived for you to defend and explain your Tanzanian-Canadian logic to prove your point to me and to the world that there was no denying ethnic Tamils faced discrimination in Sri Lanka.”

• What is that the Tamils have been denied in Sri Lanka that other ethnic communities in Sri Lanka enjoy! Speak out Deepak, let’s hear it.; • If half the Tamil population live in the South amicably with the majority Sinhalese not feeling or complaining about discrimination, explain to

us why this phenomenon, Deepak! Crunch time is here right now Deepak, Come on give me/us your explanation. You say the Tamils have been discriminated, and I say, Hell no, you better lie no more”;

• If 40% of the population in the capital Colombo is Tamils, what are they doing there if they have been discriminated? Crunch time Deepak, explain this phenomenon. You say the Tamils have been discriminated, and I say, Hell no, you better lie no more”;

• In the one mile long commercial drag in Pettah in Colombo, every second shop is owned by Tamils and patronized by the majority Sinhalese. This is where the shop signs say Ganesh Sari Emproium, Selliah Jewellers, Ponnaia Grains & Spices, Nadarajah Kanji Café, Kandaiya Jaffna

147

Gold Shop, Best Tamil Thosai Boutique, and so forth. Surely Deepak, what the hell are these Tamils doing along Main Street in Pettah if they are discriminated making millions of rupees off their majority Sinhalese patrons? Explain your thesis Deepak. Your crunch time is now to defend your lie in parliament.

• When the July 1983 riots broke out in Colombo and the Tamils got it bad, not because the alleged discrimination of the Tamils by the majority Sinhalese but a reaction that the Sinhalese had enough crap from these Northern Tamils having terrorized and kicked out 27,000 Sinhalese between 1971 and 1981 from the North where they had lived for generations, and the 13 Sinhalese soldiers who were ambushed and killed by the Tamil Tigers and their bodies were brought to Colombo. By then the Tamils were enjoying a superior education system in the North than from the rest of the country. Deepak, memorize these numbers and regurgitate them before you open your mouth in parliament next time to spit on Sri Lanka saying that the Tamils have been discriminated.

In 1983, the predominantly Tamil Jaffna District had 555 government schools for a Tamil student population of 207,524, and the capital city Colombo had only 251 such schools for 231,690 multi-ethnic students. Forty-one per cent of these predominantly Tamil Jaffna District schools had Government approved science laboratories compared to an island average of 19.6 per cent. Deepak, let me have your Tanzanian-Canadian logic to explain that these numbers equate that the Tamils have been discriminated. Let’s have it Deepak. Show me and the world your smarts or else I will tell the world that your crock is full of cod’s wallop and that you lied through your Tanzanian coconut kernel smiling white teeth.

• When the riots took place in July 1983, the representation of Tamils in the professions was far higher than their ethnic ratio. Unemployment among males were among the majority Sinhalese (14.7%) than Tamils (8.8%). The Physical Quality if Life Indices were higher for Tamils then in Sri Lanka than the general population. And remember my telling that Tamils were a ‘privileged minority’ compared to the majority Sinhalese who ‘were a wronged majority’. These are the facts that would destroy your myth that …there was no denying ethnic Tamils faces discrimination in Sri Lanka.” That’s what got my goat. And I said under my breath, This guy is a liar”.

• Deepak, let me make this the last item for you to defend your statement in …there was no denying ethnic Tamils faces discrimination in Sri Lanka” in parliament.

When Colombo was burning and the Tamils were getting the brunt of the Sinhalese anger, the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court was a Tamil, and the Attorney General was a Tamil, and five of the 10 Deputy Inspectors-General of the Police were Tamil and several Diplomatic postings were of Tamils including the Sri Lanka High Commissioner in London. Deepak, and you had the sordid gumption to tell us Canadians and the world that …there was no denying ethnic Tamils faces discrimination in Sri Lanka” in parliament. Explain your lie…the mirror, mirror on the wall, who is the liar of them all idiocy. It is time you stop spitting on Sri Lanka. It is time you stop playing and feeding the Canadian Tamil Tiger cubs with love so they will stop feeding you with lies about Sri Lanka It is time that you accept that you as a Canadian Parliamentarian has no moral authority to speak on discrimination of Tamils in Sri Lanka”, when it was Canada who let the Tamil Tiger rump collect two million dollars a month for 13 years to stuff the Tamil Tiger war chest to buy sophisticated war weapons to kill innocent Sri Lankans in the thousands. Let’s have a public debate on your statement in parliament …there was no

148

denying ethnic Tamils faces discrimination in Sri Lanka.” Bring with you John Baird, Lynne Yelich, Rathika Sitsabaisan and Patrick Brown, all anti-Sri Lanka protagonists, and I will take all five of you. I will stand firm by my words – Tamils have been a privileged minority all along and the Sinhalese have been the wrong majority. Deepak, my strength is the Truth”. But here is what all five of you are against in a debate with me. I have a handicap because all five of you did not have the gumption nor civility to acknowledge that by wiping out the most ruthless terrorists in the world, the Tamil Tigers on 19 May 2009, the Mahinda Rajapaksa Government gave back the most treasured item of human rights, the right-to-life to 21 million peoples in Sri Lanka which had been hijacked from them by the Tamil Tiges for 27 bloody year. Shame on all of you. Deepak, you may recall the pathetic Press Release that came out of Foreign Minister Lawrence Cannon’s office when the western world praised Sri Lanka for defeating terrorism. You were his Parliamentary Secretary then. Right Deepak! Not a Bravo Sri Lanka”. Not a Way to Go, Sri Lanka!” Not a Take a Bow Sri Lanka.” That is how small minded Canada was, not wanting to antagonize the Tamil community. And here is another reason why all five of you will fair badly in a public debate with me. I have a handicap because all of you did not have the gumption, honesty and civility, to acknowledge up to this very moment, the classic human rights text book example of liberation of people used as a human shield by a terrorist group. When 295,873 Tamils were rescued by the Sri Lankan soldiers by 19 May, 2009, who had been used as a human shield by the Tamil Tigers and herded like unwashed cattle for 30 long months and moved from the west coast to the east coast, Canada should have acknowledged and thanked the Sri Lankan armed forces for bringing about this miracle. The NATO and Allied forces are still struggling to get rid of the Taliban since 2001, and that is a reality check for you. What was your problem Deepak not to acknowledge the greatness of the Sri Lankan armed forces to get rid of Tamil Tiger terrorism? What was your Conservative Government’s problem? This is the only reason why I call you all a bunch of Humbugs trying to show the world that Canada is concerned about the last five months of the Eelam War IV, that you believe when human rights were violated. The last five months of a 27 year bloody war. Ha! What rubbish! What piffle, Deepak! I am still prepared to debate on your statement in parliament ….there was no denying ethnic Tamils faces discrimination in Sri Lanka…” I say that your statement is piffle, baloney, cod’s wallop and Humbug. And I am not prepared to accept that rubbish. Your spitting on Sri Lanka, just has to stop. You recall what I said earlier in this letter. I am still romancing with my Motherland, Sri Lanka, that I left 58 years ago. You said there was no denying ethnic Tamils faced discrimination in Sri Lanka”, and I say to your face Deepak, Hell No, you better lie no more!” WHAT IS THE TAMIL NATIONAL ALLIANCE COMPLAINING ABOUT? Annex ‘AH’ The present TNA before it was created by the LTTE in 2001 were all members of some Tamil political group. We know that LTTE took up arms alongside 35 other militant groups against the State of Sri Lanka well before 1983. The same parties and members that were scared to open their mouths except to say ‘Yes’ to everything LTTE ordered, today enjoys freedom of speech and a whole lot of other freedoms that they did not enjoy under LTTE even as Tamils. The TNA leader did not mind surrounding himself with Sinhala body guards then but he does now – what hypocrisy! The

149

Northern Chief Minister lived over 70 years of his life in Colombo but now complains of hearing only Sinhalese voices after living just 3 years in the North. LTTE is now no more. People need to now compare the silence of these Tamil representatives including the incumbent Chief Minister of the Northern Province throughout LTTE reign and the noise they are making now that the Sri Lankan troops have eliminated the LTTE ground force. M Abraham Sumanthiran MP at the second reading of the budget on 28th Oct 2014 You stop people of this country going to meet their very near relatives” – how many Tamils were able to leave the North and how many Tamils from the South could travel to the North during LTTE reign and did the likes of Sumanthiran come out to complain? How many in the TNA were actually living in the North when the LTTE was running a defacto territory? How many in the TNA were too scared to even travel to the North during the reign of the LTTE? How many in the TNA continue to live outside of the Northern Province still? Who is pulling the wool over the eyes of people? Who says roads, bridges, mega projects are built for Tamils? These infrastructure belongs to the State of Sri Lanka and ALL of its citizens, not ONLY Tamils. Sumanthiran et all need to get that correct. The projects will continue whether Tamils appreciate it or not. We would like to know how many times Sumanthiran and Sambanthan actually travelled to the North unless they were ordered to attend LTTE meetings? How many times did they travel on their own without permission by the LTTE? If Sumanthiran and bandwagon don’t appreciate the development in the North it is understandable – the LTTE which created the TNA did not spend a cent on infrastructure except to build LTTE offices, bunkers and homes for Mahaveer families. Why does the TNA not wish to have the Yal Devi train running from South to North and North to South? Is it because with travel and exchange of people and communication, the people will soon begin to realize that the TNA has been fooling them. Let’s also remind ourselves that Vanni, Mullaitivu and Kilinochchi areas were denied electricity by the LTTE for the sole reason that they wanted the Tamils living in these areas to be totally in the dark about what was going on around them. It was from these areas that LTTE plucked its cadres. If not we would like to be statistically shown by the TNA how many of LTTE cadres were men, women or children who were from rich high caste/class homes! There are security zones overseas, there are restrictions to areas that people can travel to overseas, there are areas that even natives have to get permission to travel to overseas, people cannot go anywhere at any time they like without permission overseas – why should that case be any different in Sri Lanka?

150

Sumanthiran asks ‘why is the North being treated as a separate country’ – why did he not pose this question to the LTTE who wanted to separate not only the North but even part of the East. TNA has yet to translate the ITAK Constitution into English where the question has been asked if ITAK is Federal or Confederal. Can Sumanthiran claim that LTTE was destroyed fully when the Security Forces nabbed a former LTTE collecting signatures on blank UNHRC war crimes forms for a member of the TNA? What about the scores of other LTTE members who have been helped to flee Sri Lanka and claim refugee/asylum status? Thus we would like to know how many more LTTE cadres remain in Sri Lanka pretending to be civilians and how many other LTTE have fled overseas for until they are apprehended and legal action taken against them the country has to remain alert and the security needs to remain beefed up throughout the country. Let us remind the Tamil people that before 1983 there were 35 Tamil armed groups operating in the North but how many Tamils actually informed this status to the State authorities in order to take action against them before they turned into murderers that killed Sinhalese, Muslims and even Tamils in what was a killing spree? Let us also remind Tamils that Tamil homes throughout the country whether forced or otherwise kept Tiger operatives on intelligence missions as well as allowed homes to hide caches of arms! There is a big dent in the trust factor which to be broken requires a lot of giving from the Tamil side in the light of some hard home truths! Sumanthiran is also saying that the money given to the North was not given to the people’s representatives meaning the TNA… however the more important question is what did the TNA do with the money allocated to the Northern Province to provide for the needs of the people. As far as records stands the TNA has yet to spend the allotted money that they requested. Of Rs 5,831 Million allocated by Govt for North, the TNA Provincial Administration has utilised only 25.17% up to Sep 30th 2014. The LTTE made USD300million annual profits. LTTE fronts were holding charity events to raise funds. LTTE fronts ran propaganda campaigns to raise funds. LTTE fronts appealed to charities to raise funds. With so much money collected over the years isn’t the Tamil people curious to know where that money went to? When LTTE made USD300m a year and did nothing to the North, the GOSL gave the Northern Province Rs5.831m of which Wigneswaran and coterie has utilized only 25% as of September 30th 2014. This allocation of Rs.5.831m is the highest allocation of all the provinces in Sri Lanka – what the TNA requested the GOSL gave without question so why has the TNA not spent that money? What is TNA whining about when the money under its own control ends up not spent! In addition to the Rs5.8m allocation to the Northern Province, the GOSL from its national budget has spent

89,031m on Jaffna District 60,529m on Kilinochchi District 34,407m on Mullaitivu District 39,500m on Vavuniya District 62,804m on Mannar District

151

The GOSL has spent from its national budget Rs.290,271 million for the Northern Province alone from 2009 to September 2014. How many Tamils in the North or even the rest of Sri Lanka, or for that matter Tamils living abroad including foreign embassies etc know that TNA Northern Provincial Council has spent only 25% of the budget that it requested from the Government of Sri Lanka? This is a perfect example of the TNA’s No Action Talk Only policy because just as the LTTE cared only for its deranged megalmanic objectives the TNA offshoot has the same objectives and have nothing to do with uplifting the lives of any Tamils apart from the high caste/class Tamil circle and associated nefarious entities it belongs to. Sumanthiran claims that the development projects will not fool the Tamil people, who said these projects were to fool the Tamils? When none of those funding LTTE cared to enhance the productivity and help the Tamil people contribute towards the national GDP does the TNA wish to continue this status quo because from the manner it has withheld spending the money allocated to the Northern Province it is a clear indication that the TNA like the LTTE wishes to keep the Tamil people subservient and under their control in what is a run up to a master-slave scenario. The TNA doesn’t do anything for the Tamils and doesn’t wish others to do anything for the Tamils too! Why should the TNA complain about development being made to the North, that development is for the entire nation to reap. Sumanthiran and TNA are mistaken to think that development of any kind, upliftment of infrastructure and investment drives are meant only for Tamils – they are meant for Sinhalese and Muslims to enjoy as well. What type of Tamil representatives would request the Tamil people to boycott an event wherein a train service that had been destroyed by the LTTE was relaunched to help people travel throughout the country without hassle? Will the foreign envoys please request from the TNA to reveal how much the LTTE charged for people to travel during its heyday of terror, how many Tamils had to pledge their deeds in order to take medical treatment in the South, how many Tamils had to even keep a member of the family as guarantee of their return and how difficult it was for Tamils to travel to the North. Today, Tamils in the South are going every other day to the North and returning. Some even go early morning and return in the night! Moreover as representatives of the people since 2001 let us ask in what ways did the TNA help the Tamil people

Did the TNA stop Tamil children from being kidnapped by the LTTE? – NO Did the TNA stop Tamil children from being taken by force to LTTE ‘orphanages’ ? – NO Did the TNA stop Tamil children from being denied their fundamental right to education? – NO Did the TNA question LTTE on why Tamil children were being turned into child soldiers? – NO Did the TNA demand from LTTE that Tamil children be allowed to educate themselves and qualify themselves and become professionals instead of being given a gun and instructions to kill? – NO

152

How can this same TNA now come and complain about the welfare of Tamil children when for 30 odd years we do not know how many Tamil children were denied not only their right to education, but their right to live as a child, enjoy life as a child, be fondled as a child by parents and relatives and play like a child instead of holding guns and killing people. How dare TNA come now after watching LTTE and being part of the LTTE by virtue of association pretend now to be paragons of virtue! Let it also be said that it is ONLY and ONLY because of the largess of the Government and its leaders that the TNA remains uninvestigated nationally for links with a terrorist movement banned by nations. If the Government has taken action to incorporate UNSC Resolution 1373 to ban LTTE fronts and individuals what is stopping them from taking action against the TNA? This is a big question mark raised by the general public of Sri Lanka which continues to ask why the TNA is not held accountable for its links, support and association with the LTTE over the years. If LTTE is held accountable by the UN investigation for any war crimes not only the banned LTTE fronts overseas but the TNA too must be held accountable and charges pressed against them. This is all the more poignant in the light of evidence that establishes the TNA was formed by the LTTE to carry out its agenda politically. MISREADING AND DISTORTING THE SRI LANKAN WAR 2009-2012 Annex ‘AJ’ The recent UNHRC resolution sponsored by USA and directed at the government of Sri Lanka was the culmination of a campaign that began during the last stages of Eelam War IV. Since 2010 articulate circles in the West have been convinced that there had been “40,000 civilian deaths” during this phase. In contrast Rohan Gunaratna asserted that there were 1400 civilian deaths, of which 200 were inflicted by the LTTE. Both calculations are erroneous. Estimates provided by three moderate Tamils who have had regular access to the Tamil personnel who were on the ground indicate that the death toll, inclusive of Tamil Tiger personnel, was in the range 10,000 to 16,000, in circumstances where it was impossible to differentiate in all cases between those Tiger, those recently conscripted as auxiliaries and those truly civilian. It is towards the clarification of these specific circumstances and a criticism of the claims presented by a variety of human rights agencies, moral crusaders and media engines that this essay is directed. The campaign has been sustained by a mixture of lies and half-truths amidst truths, compounded further by a wilful blindness to the manner in which the LTTE utilised the Tamil populace in its domain as labour pool, protective shield and bargaining chip meant to induce a ”humanitarian intervention.” The massaging of death toll figures, therefore, is just one facet of a massive propaganda heist. Death Toll, January-May 2009: As the SL Army advanced on three fronts, the LTTE lost control of the A9 arterial road and its administrative capital at Kilinochchi by 1 January 2009. Thereafter, its forces and the people they had herded together were trapped in the Vanni Pocket, namely, the north eastern corner of the island between the A9 and the coast, a district-size chunk of territory that shrank continuously as the government forces advanced till the Tigers and remaining civilians – roughly 200,000 in crude estimate — were sandwiched into 42 square kilometres in mid-April.

153

After the remaining Tiger terrain was captured by mid-May 2009, the first estimates of the numbers killed that were presented by Holmes, the UN representative, in Colombo, was 7,721. Further down the track his former media officer at that time, Gordon Weiss appeared before the ABC and claimed that the death toll was between 10,000 and 40,000. Even as late as June 2011 the Times in London referred to 20,000 civilian dead in the course of a summary review of the Sri Lankan war. However, the UN Panel of Experts appointed on his own initiative by Ban Ki-Moon presented their report (the Darusman Report) in March 2011 and stated that the original figure of 7,721 was at the lower end of the scale and there could have been “as many as 40,000 deaths.” In next to no time this speculation became hard fact in news items from prestigious media chains. Thus, Kerry O’Brien of ABC asserted that “40,000 civilians were killed” and spoke of the “brutal slaughter of humans.” The widespread acceptance of this type of claim was largely the product of the emotional appeal of the Channel 4 documentary called “Killing Fields.” Gordon Weiss chipped in by highlighting his position under the rubric “Sri Lanka’s “Srebenica Moment.” The imagery associated with these two moments of state-organised genocide in Kampuchea and Serbia had the impact they were designed to arouse. Despite its weak evidential foundation and explicit surmise, the figure of 40,000 became an established fact in some minds. Also occluded was the character of the UN panel under Darusman and the appalling analytical capacities displayed within its report. The Shortcomings of the Darusman Report: It is remarkable that Ban Ki-Moon selected three individuals from a legal background to undertake a survey of a military campaign in a land with which they had limited geographical knowledge and no cultural familiarity. The absence of military expertise and social science capacities are immediately apparent in its coverage. Independent academics working with the Marga Research Institute in Colombo have shown that there was “a large lacuna [in this] information gathering exercise”; that many sources were not divulged and that significant omissions meant that the Panel relied “on a one-sided body of sources.” Indeed, the “adversarial stance” taken by the Darusman Panel resulted not only in findings marred by internal contradictions, but also revealed a failure to comprehend “the formidable challenge which the government faced.” This was a failure of contextualization and proportionality. A balanced review cannot focus on death estimates without placing the figure beside the number of Tamils, both Tiger and genuine civilian, who survived. We now know that at around 280-290,000, including roughly 11,000 deemed Tiger, emerged alive from the crucible of the Vanni Pocket between January and mid-May 2009. By mid-April 2009 about 60,000 had reached the safety of government territory by sneaking through on land or sea. On the 19-23 April the army breached the LTTE”s last redoubt in a remarkable operation. State media images on TV and print revealed streams of people, including Tigers who had downed arms, struggling across lagoon and dune to safety. As Reddy from India described the scene, “an international and local media team that visited the area on a military-conducted tour saw for itself the terror-stricken faces.” This mass has been variously estimated as 103,000, 106,000 and even 120,000, but it included many Tiger fighters and such leading LTTE functionaries as Daya Master and George Master.

154

The Darusman Report’s failure to give weight to such events is quite remarkable. This shortcoming is compounded by its refusal to give adequate weight to the character of the LTTE regime. The LTTE War Machine: Prabhakaran has been described by former colleagues as well as Tamil dissidents as a person who believed in the pre-emptive strike and the killing of individuals who stood in his way. The LTTE had spurned the opportunity of self-determination via negotiation in both 1995 and 2006. Throughout the ceasefire-period 2002-06 it built up its military capacities. This preparation included paramilitary training for civilians. When the LTTE initiated Eelam War IV in July 2006 it was confident of success. Matters turned out different. By late 2007 their military capacity in the Eastern Province had been reduced to nil. By January 2008 they lost control of the north western coastline which had enabled a supply of arms from India. Outgunned and outmanned, their troops were forced into a retreat that moved from west to east for the most part. They used landmines, bunds, trenches and booby traps to slow down the government forces. The LTTE also increased its conscription of civilians to build these defences and replenish its troops. At the same time the civilian population was induced to retreat en masse ahead of the battle lines – moving from west to east. Though subject to multiple displacements, these people faced limited danger at the outset in 2008. But from January 2009 they were in increasing danger of being submerged in the crossfire. This was the LTTE’s intent. The civilians were, now, not only a source of labour and conscripts; they were also hostages shielding the Tigers and providing a concern for humanitarian agencies which intervened and sought a ceasefire from the warring parties. Since the LTTE had no intention of releasing the Tamil people or respecting any ceasefire, such interventions were in fact a form of military aid for the LTTE. The humanitarian outcry raised by AI, HRW, ICG as well as some Western leaders was also a potential escape route that would have enabled the LTTE leadership to return to the fight another day. The reasoning of the LTTE leadership was revealed subsequently by Kumaran Pathmanathan (their principal logistics man abroad): “when I reflect upon the past I think the LTTE leadership also had no choice. If they released the people first, then only the Tigers would be left there. Thereafter all of them could have been wiped out.” The shielding capacity of the mass of civilians was all the more because, from 2008 if not earlier, most Tigers were fighting in check-shirts, trousers, shorts and sarongs. The SL army’s night operations and the success of their snipers as well as the exigencies of retreat encouraged such a policy. As General Fonseka told an investigator one aspect of the LTTE military tactics at this point was to mingle with fleeing Tamil civilians in order to infiltrate army lines and wreak havoc from within. In a communiqué on the 9th March 2009 Blake, the US ambassador in Colombo, noted that “the LTTE maintains the fiction that civilians do not want to leave. All evidence points to the contrary: several civilians have been shot trying to escape, many others have escaped.” Anna Neistat of HRW was equally adamant on this point in March 2009 after meeting Tamils in refugee camps who had fled the war zone.

155

Though Weiss and the Darusman Report mention such facts, their overall reviews downplay the significance and focus largely on the government’s role in the injury of “civilians” through indiscriminate shelling. Their estimates of the civilian dead simply gloss over the difficulty of distinguishing civilian and Tiger; and attach little weight to the fact that the LTTE was the creator of this circumstance: the sandwich situation in which their own Tamil populace was placed and their use as so many sandbags. Channel 4 went further in manufacturing a lie: they asserted that the Tamil “civilians were driven from their homes by government forces.” Amidst numerous sources, the writings of the Hindu correspondent as well as the Tamil journalist DBS Jeyaraj provide conclusive evidence against such calumny. In a passionate essay in April 2009 Jeyaraj, a senior Tamil journalist writing from Toronto, spoke of the situation of his Tamil people under the LTTE as “an open prison” and celebrated the escape “from bondage” of 103,000 “entrapped” people that was secured by an army operation between the 19th and 23rd April 2009. In noting that some civilians may have died in the course of the war, he contended that those who reached safety had gained that “most important human right, namely the right to life;” while adding that “it is a matter of record that soldiers involved in the evacuation have been deeply touched by the tragic situation of civilians.” Summary: What we have seen in the last four years therefore is a tale of successful dissimulation that has built on half-truths by the addition of lies and the wilful neglect of significant factors. The 40,000 figure on death toll is a surmise that has gained a definitiveness that it cannot bear; while disregarding the extent to which people died through natural causes exacerbated by the starvation diet forced upon them, the high incidence of death by snake bite during journeys through jungle (highlighted by Anandasangaree, the veteran Tamil politician); and failing to enumerate the 600 or so dissident Tamil prisoners executed by the LTTE once they found them a burden. Such details have been conveniently forgotten by the media outlets. Since sensational news is their bread and butter this is not surprising. But the moral crusaders have no such excuse. It would seem that emotion and a tendency to evaluate complex scenarios in black and white terms have clouded their judgment. They have also tended to draw upon data provided by Sri Lankan Tamil expatriates who are driven by emotion of a different character: that of vengeance for the discrimination suffered by their people over the last forty years. Such individuals as Daran in England and Jegan Waran in Australia have supplied politicians and media agencies with one-sided and questionable data. Revenge has likewise promoted the activities of Sinhalese journalists and other who have fled in the face of intimidation from the Rajapaksa government in recent years. Westerners such as Benjamin Dix who have worked in LTTE territory and developed ideological attachments towards the cause of Eelam also seem to have gone overboard in their testimonies. Such combinations have revealed a capacity to mount an effective propaganda war that has captured the high ground. It is only “high ground” in terms of power exerted. As I have argued, its neglect of detail and its mixing of lies and exaggerations with elements of truth means that its heights are not those of elevated ethics. The image from mid-May 2009, revealing one Tamil man co walking out of a charred and a jarring scene behind him, was presented by the Ministry of Defence propaganda device; but it could easily be interpreted as a tale of the devastation that unfolded in mid-May in the LTTE’s last redoubt. That is it could be fitted into a tale of “shelling and slaughter” by the SL Army. However, what many readers will not know is that the LTTE followed

156

standard practice among retreating armies and began blowing up all their equipment from 15th May or so (information personally communicated by Murali Reddy and Kanchan Prasad who were at SL Army command HQ at that moment – supported by details in US Dept of State, Report of Congress on Incidents during the Recent Conflict in Sri Lanka, pdf, 2009. There are ,many images in the MoD site which show the results of this explosive work). Sustenance for those who got clear of the war zone –a govt propaganda image from the Daily News – though there is strong support for the generalisation that the troops treated the fleeing survivors with considerable kindness to judge from the conclusions provided in UTHR Report No. 34 and the testimonies collected by Narendran Rajasingham at the IDP centres in April and the first hand observations of Ptrasad and Reddy). SRI LANKA MUST DEMAND : INVESTIGATE THE INVESTIGATION (UNHRC /UN AND ITS RESOLUTIONS MUST BE PROBED) Annex ‘AK’ With just days for the UNHRC Panel to conclude accepting submissions it has emerged that the UNHRC has been cheating the system by providing UNHRC war crimes forms to only one party and that too clandestinely with links to LTTE-TNA. The shocking discovery immediately takes us back to sample formats appearing on internet to help Tamils compile cases against Sri Lanka during the Panel of Expert investigation. We now question how many of the ‘witnesses’ that the Panel of Experts claimed to quote from were bogus people. We question how many witness accounts were lies. The discovery of signatures being collected on blank forms to write lies to establish a case for the UNHRC panel against Sri Lanka should make the UNHRC ashamed. The Government of Sri Lanka must not waste any more time but to publicly and internationally make its case and immediately demand an investigation into the investigation that started out with lies, is continuing with lies and is likely to end in lies to create a precedent and establish an agenda that will be detrimental for the sovereignty of Sri Lanka and the region as well. The officials of the Government must immediately get into action and prepare their case that Sri Lanka is not going to accept any more allegations until an investigation is launched and concrete evidence is given for the allegations that have been made against Sri Lanka since 2009. Sri Lanka must also demand that an investigation be launched into all parties that have been carrying out an anti-Sri Lanka campaign and reveal who funds them and why. UN Must Investigate Why UN must investigate Ban Ki Moon, the UN Secretary General initiated a 3 member advisory panel to advise him on ‘alleged violations of international human rights and humanitarian law during the final stages of the conflict in Sri Lanka’ This was NOT a UN General Assembly or UN Security Council appointed Panel. It was a panel appointed to advise the UN Secretary General. The panel was to advise him on the final stages of the conflict – the Resolutions have gone beyond the final stages of the conflict and involve post-conflict scenarios where only the GOSL is targeted since there is no LTTE ground force following its defeat in May 2009.

157

How did an advisory panel, appointed to advise the UNSG on a private capacity end up becoming the basis on which Resolutions and UNHRC reports have been based? There is an illegal dimension to what has transpired. If so who will investigate? Why have successive Resolutions gone beyond the final stages of the conflict wherein the post-2009 allegations are meant to solely target the GoSL? The Ban Ki Moon appointed panel was to advise him on ‘the implementation of the commitment on human rights accountability made in the Joint Statement issued by President Rajapaksa of Sri Lanka and the Secretary-General’ when he visited Sri Lanka on 22 May 2009 That joint statement being referred says thus The Secretary General underlined the importance of an accountability process for addressing violations of international humanitarian and human rights law. The Government will take measures to address those grievances” (Nowhere does the Sri Lankan Government commit to undertaking an investigation nor does the GOSL agree to an international investigation) Why did the UNSG appoint a panel when there was no such undertaking by Sri Lanka to conduct an investigation in the joint statement that is being referred to? How did a Panel appointed for personal advisory opinion end up as source for successive UNHRC Resolutions and the basis on which UNHRC head based her reports? The appointment of a Panel inspite of the GoSL appointing its own panel The LLRC was appointed in March 2010 Why did the UNSG not give Sri Lanka any time to carry out its own investigation? The PoE was appointed in June 2010 hardly a month after the Sri Lankan Government appointed the LLRC – this is unfair and does not indicate any respect or regard for domestic mechanisms. Questioning the modalities of the Panel The Panel says ‘it is not a fact finding or investigative body’ if so on what basis of evidence did the Panel conclude that Violations of humanitarian law occurred and classified sources as ‘confidential’ denying cross-examination by Sri Lanka for 20 years On what grounds did the Panel characterize LTTE as ‘the most disciplined and most nationalist of the Tamil militant groups’.

158

Why did the Panel state that the conflict ended ‘tragically’ when the entire country was relieved that they could walk out of their homes without fear. Only LTTE supporters would have felt a tragic end to the conflict! Why does the Panel refer to and make comments on the family of HE the President when their mandate was only the last stages of the conflict – another instance of bias of the Panel? Questioning the appointment of Maruzuki Darusman as Chairman of the PoE The panel appointed to offer advice must be minus prejudices. Ban Ki Moon chose Darusman inspite of his criticism of the GOSL while he served as a member of the International Independent Group of Eminent Persons appointed in 2007. The IIGEP including Darusman refused to participate in the sessions of the Commission of Inquiry into Human Rights violations. Ban Ki Moon was wrong to appoint a biased Darusman while Darusman himself should have declined to accept given his bias. Appointment of Yasmin Sooka to the PoE. She has been since associated with pro-LTTE groups and is now serving in the Advisory Council of an anti-SL campaign The conflict of interest are highlighted: She was employed and funded by a EU established entity serving as Executive Director for the Foundation of Human Rights. As EU were en bloc pushing for charges against Sri Lanka the biased nature of her selection to the Panel needs to be investigated. The PoE in its report of March 2011 declared that it found ‘credible allegations’ of crime Organizations and Media have substituted ‘allegations’ with ‘evidence’. The guilty are Amnesty International, International Crisis Group, Australian Red Cross, Human Rights Law Centre, ABC Four Corners, ABC Radio Australia, AFP, BBC, Channel 4, Groundviews, Reuters, Sydney Morning Herald, the Australian, Voice of America, Gordon Weiss The Poe in its report of March 2011 declared that there could have been as many as 40,000 civilian deaths.” ‘as many as 40,000’ became 40,000 and more deaths quoted without any sources/evidence

159

Challenging the 40,000 and more dead figures Accusers need to give valid explanation and evidence as to why GOSL should wish to kill 40,000 and more while physically saving close to 300,000 at the risk and loss of lives of their own soldiers? Whether deaths were 40,000 or more the accusers have yet to give a single name to the dead. Accusers need to explain why US satellite failed to pick up 40,000 or more burials. US satellite found only 3 mass graves – 1 was a LTTE grave. Investigate the dead figures Investigate on what grounds the PoE refused to accept the UN Country Team estimate of 7721 deaths a report which the UN is not making public? Investigate how and who started making obnoxious death toll figures and how the media was allowed to ridicule and humiliate a country without any basis for accusations. 13 March 2009 – Navi Pillay quoted 2800 deaths 24 April 2009 – UN gave 6432 deaths 13 May 2009 – UN country team gave 7721 deaths SL government census in the war zone which was carried out by Tamil teachers in the region in Feb/March 2011 came with a figure of 7432 un accounted Even pro-LTTE website gave death total as 7,398 Investigate the Charles Petrie report Investigate why the UN did not wish to disclose the UN country team death estimate report Investigate why Charles Petrie report was established to create the notion that because of its conclusion that the UN Failed the report was kept from being made public Tell the Sri Lankan public why the UN failed the 20m people throughout 30 years by the UN doing nothing to stop LTTE terror Investigate Gordon Weiss

160

He was the UN Spokesman in Colombo Investigate his associations with pro-LTTE groups and in what capacity he is attending pro-LTTE events and speaking at pro-LTTE events as well Investigate on what basis he hyped civilian death toll figures from initial 10,000 to 30,000 and 40,000 Was there an official NO FIRE ZONE Rule of armed conflicts and establishment of a no fire zone requires both parties to the conflict to agree and officially accept the demarcation. There was no such accepted written agreement. The No Fire Zone was only a one sided demarcation created by the SL troops to ask civilians to move to safety. Investigate why LTTE moved into an area that was meant to be for civilians Investigate why LTTE moved artillery into the area and fired from within civilians Allegations of Navi Pillai taking case of Sri Lanka Conflict of interest in her ethnicity Her neutrality questioned in using LTTE sources she has issued derogatory statements against Sri Lanka from her office without any evidence or quoting from LTTE sources Ignoring 30 years of LTTE crimes and insisting only on the last 3 months of the conflict procedural bias by circulating her own incriminating report while refusing to attach Sri Lanka’s response attempting to polarize communities by bringing up isolated cases of religious issues while totally ignoring the over 700 attacks of mosques in the UK and attempting to link rapes in the North with military presence in order to use that as a ground to demand the removal of the military, another imperial outsourced agenda item. making statements without substantiate evidence in accusing the GOSL as being ‘authoritarian’. Investigate the credibility of the 3 members appointed by Navi Pillai

161

Has the UN conducted and concluded an investigation on Marti Ahtisaari accused of accepting bribes by the Albanian Mafia to deliver Kosovo independence Investigate how UNHRC war crimes forms came to be in the hands of TNA-LTTE This is the most shocking and astonishing disclosure and completely exposes the UNHRC An immediate investigation needs to be launched as to how UNHRC war crimes forms have been given to only one party This connects to former allegations of how sample letters of how to lodge complaints to the PoE was made available via internet and questions the credibility of the PoE witness sources too though these sources have got 20 years anonymity. Investigate the organizations taking an anti-Sri Lanka campaign The organizations that have teams tasked to campaign against Sri Lanka need to be investigated. Who is funding them, why are they been funded, how much are they paid, what is the motive behind the funding – if parties are being paid to carry out an anti-Sri Lanka campaign of slander, lies and distortions all these entities need to be investigated. Ex: Canadian Tamil Congress is proscribed as a pro-LTTE organization by the GOSL, the same CTC donated $50,000 to Amnesty International and AI has been at the forefront of anti-SL campaigns. Investigate Foreign Parliamentarians coerced into supporting pro-LTTE and taking an anti-SL line using their portfolios All foreign parliamentarians and international officials need to be investigated for their association with the proscribed entities named by the GOSL These investigations will reveal in what manner these foreign MPs and international figures have agreed to provide backing to pro-LTTE groups Investigate Channel 4 Who funded the Channel 4 documentaries On what basis can a documentary which inserts edited clippings and inserts them to a storyline the producers and funding parties wish to convey become a transparent and factual account? Investigate some of the characters that C4 interviews for many of the star witnesses have been proven LTTE members Investigate and disclose the sources to verify authenticity of the video and whether the clips were actually taken from mobile phones as was claimed. Investigate the documentary ‘Lies Agreed Upon

162

Testimonies of over 50 Tamil civilians that confirmed there was no direct fire from SL forces Testimonies that praised the SL forces Testimonies that the SL forces only returned fire when LTTE fired first Investigate the 6 Tamil doctors and their affidavits Investigate the doctors confirming adequate medical supplies Investigate the doctors assessment of civilian deaths Investigate the doctors who confirmed that LTTE repeatedly located their artillery in close proximity to hospitals Investigate all the 16 organizations and 424 individuals most of whom are now holding foreign passports GOSL has banned 16 pro-LTTE organizations and declared 424 individuals as supporting terrorists under UN Security Council Resolution 1373 All members of the UN who have endorsed the Counter Terrorism Committee Resolution 1373 need to assist the GOSL to investigate and charge these entities and individuals for their links to a designated terrorist organization. All foreign passport holding Tamils need to be thus investigated immediately Investigate the precedent being created Sri Lanka is the first country that the UNHRC is investigating a concluded conflict without UN Security Council or UN General Assembly sanction. Sri Lanka needs to know why throughout 30 years the UN did not investigate or declare the LTTE as a terrorist entity despite its terror ways and despite LTTE being designated as a terrorist entity since 1997. The UNHRC panel must have already prepared their report but the compelling data available is sufficient for the Sri Lankan State to demand that answers to their questions be given first before the UNHRC reveals their report to make recommendations we know will only target the Sri Lankan Government which has been the plan all along. We need to be given a rational, a logical, a legal and acceptable answer to all and more questions above. The Sri Lankan Government must now itself demand that questions to their queries must be answered before the UN points any incriminating fingers at the Sri Lankan nation or attempts to make any proposals that set out to divide the country.

163

HOW CAN SRI LANKA BENEFIT FROM UN SECURITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION 1373 Annex ‘AL’ The UNSC Resolution 1373 is important for the sole reason that it elevated the ‘war on terror’ to a Global Security Law. It was proactive legislation at international level. To be proactive in action all 192 UN member states need to assist and cooperate with nations incorporating the UNSC Resolution 1373. This then necessitates and binds all UN member states to take action against the 16 organizations declared as LTTE fronts along with those that head these organizations as well as the 424 individuals declared as LTTE supporters. Given that most of the individuals and organizations are operating from overseas and individuals probably hold foreign passports the GOSL must insist that the nations where these individuals and organizations are operating from be immediately investigated jointly with the GOSL law enforcement authorities. EU member nations and other Western nations need to realize that the global war on terror is not restricted to Islamic terrorists on their terror lists alone. LTTE has proven far more dangerous than all terrorist movements put together. The UN Security Council was established under Chapter V Article 24 giving it the responsibility to ensure the ‘maintenance of international peace and security’. Chapter VII gave ‘action with respect to threats to the peace, breaches of the peace and acts of aggression’. Article 41 gave the Security Council the right to authorize non-military action. Article 42 permitted military action should Article 41 response be inadequate. Article 48 the most important makes any decision by the UN Security Council binding upon all UN Member states. UN Security Council passed Resolution 1373 on 28 September 2001. It was to operate under Chapter VII of the UN Charter. This makes the Resolution binding on all UN member states. Are Sri Lanka’s officials aware that noncompliance is theoretically at least subject to sanctions??? Thus UNSC Resolution 1373 required all UN member states to change their domestic law (criminal and domestic intelligence) parallel to the fight on terrorism. If UN SC Resolution 1373 makes terrorism a serious crime and binds all 192 UN member states to comply, the Sri Lankan Government needs to start making demands on what fellow UN member states need to do to rope in the LTTE fronts and LTTE supporters that Sri Lanka banned in April 2014. Even though there is no international definition on terrorism/terrorist that nations have declared entities as terrorists and banned them using UNSC Resolution 1373 suffices for fellow nations to take action and provide assistance to national governments. The absence of a UN defined Terrorist/Terrorism cannot be held against countries in their fight to end terrorism. If terrorism is regarded as a criminal act, it then necessitates that any country using Resolution 1373 against terrorists operating on their territory and outside requires assistance of fellow governments to arrest and investigate these entities. Therefore, we are curious about the lukewarm reaction to the 16 LTTE fronts, its leaders and the 424 individuals that Sri Lanka declared banned. The UNSC Resolution 1373 follows 4 key policies Section 1:

-Prevent and suppress the financing of terrorist acts -Criminalizing terrorist funding (direct and indirect) -Freezing assets of terrorists and any participants or accomplices

164

-Prohibiting citizens from financially aiding terrorists

Section 2: -Member nations must abstain from ‘any form of support, active or passive’ which would benefit a terrorist or affiliated organization including ‘by suppressing recruitment of members of terrorist groups and eliminating the supply of weapons to terrorists’. -Member nations required to take ‘necessary steps to prevent the commission of terrorist acts’.

UNSC Resolution 1373 compels nations to:

-Block terrorism financing by freezing assets of individuals and groups on Security Council watch lists (Has Sri Lanka placed the 16 LTTE fronts, its leaders and the 424 in the UNSC watch list, if not it must immediately do so. -Block terrorists from using their territory -Block terrorists from recruiting -Eliminate access to weapons -Deny safe haven to any terrorist members to enter their nations -Install new barriers in international migration – LTTE is famed for human smuggling and asylum/refugee frauds -Nations to make sure terrorists are ‘brought to justice’

In response to the UNSC Resolution the EU submitted its report in December 2001 following submissions by its 15 member States (Austria, Belgium, Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Ireland, Italy, Luxembourg, Netherlands, Portugal, Spain, United Kingdom and Sweden which covers actions taken within the framework of the Treaty on the European Union and the Treaty establishing the European Community. The report covers actions taken as a Bloc of Nations and not actions taken individually by nations. These GROUP actions are extremely relevant to Sri Lanka’s case given that most of the LTTE fronts are operating from Europe. If those on the list are foreign passport holders they become citizens of EU nations involved and aiding and abetting terrorism which in itself becomes a violation and requires EU member state action or at least investigation. EU nations commit to implementing measures in the Treaty on EU and the Treaty establishing the European Community to deal with the UNSC recommendations on terrorist financing / money laundering. EU Member states to decide on the offences and penalties in respective countries. EU agrees to provide for the freezing of funds/financial resources in the framework of restrictive measures EU states that the Council Directive (91/308/EEC) adopted in 1991 aims to prevent use of financial system for money laundering. If there is an obligation on financial institutions to maintain appropriate records Sri Lanka must demand EU states to get the banned LTTE fronts to disclose their accounts to show how much they raised and what the raised funds were spent on. If the Directive provides for banks to defy confidential clauses when necessary with an obligation to report suspicious transactions, the Sri Lankan government needs to lobby the EU nations to uphold what they

165

have committed to. The EU 1991 directive was amended on 19 Nov 2001 where in non-financial activities and professions which are vulnerable to misuse of money launderers was included. EU response to how it would prohibit and take measures to prevent recruitment to terrorist groups and supply of weapons to terrorists was also included in the EU Council Directive (91/477/EEC) of 1991 on control and acquisition of weapons which entails all EU member states to ensure that public safety is not in danger and prohibits possessions of certain firearms. The EU Code of Conduct on export of military equipment can be also used to check EU armaments been diverted to terrorists. The EU response to preventing terrorist acts was an early warning mechanism and exchange of information between EU Member states EU response to denying safe haven to terrorists is Article 23 (1) of the Convention implementing the Schengen Agreement which is part of EC law and become expelled from EU territory. The most relevant and important response by EU to the question on the measures taken by EU to prevent terrorists acting from EU territory against other states or citizens is useful to Sri Lanka. Has Sri Lanka made use of the Early Warning System which was established in May 1999 and available to both EU member states and candidate countries? If there is a uniform format for visas issued by EU states to prevent production and use of counterfeit or false visas how can a large number of LTTE cadres be living in EU nations? What is important for Sri Lanka is that despite the ground force of the LTTE and its leader defeated, there are a large number of LTTE cadres, LTTE supporters and accomplices to LTTE terror around us both in Sri Lanka and abroad. The recent exposure of frauds in immigration and asylum/refugee appeals in the UK should suffice for authorities to realize that terrorism is cohabitating with other international mafia. How far Sri Lanka has pressed and how much foreign nations are committed to take action honouring the UNSC Resolution 1373 is a good question to now probe. What the Sri Lankan state needs to do is to make open its requests to showcase how far it is making diplomatic appeals to generate cooperation from fellow nations to uphold the binding nature of a global international security legislation. This is not any favour Sri Lanka is asking of UN Member nations when Sri Lanka requests nations in the EU, UK, US, Canada, Australia, South Asia, South East Asia, Africa, Middle East, South America, New Zealand and Australia to take action against the 16 LTTE fronts, their leaders and the 424 individuals Sri Lanka has now banned.

Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam a.k.a LTTE a.k.a Tamil Tigers. Tamil Rehabilitation Organization a.k.a TRO. Tamil Coordinating Committee a.k.a TCC British Tamil Forum a.k.a BTF World Tamil Movement a.k.a WTM

166

Canadian Tamil Congress a.k.a CTC Australian Tamil Congress a.k.a ATC Global Tamil Forum a.k.a GTF National Council Of Canadian Tamils a.k.a NCCT a.k.a Makkal Avai Tamil National Council a.k.a TNC Tamil Youth Organization a.k.a TYO World Tamil Coordinating Committee a.k.a WTCC. Transnational Government Of Tamil Eelam a.k.a TGTE Tamil Eelam Peoples Assembly a.k.a TEPA World Tamil Relief Fund a.k.a WTRF Headquarters Group a.k.a HQ Group

These organizations were under overall control of 4 key individuals Perinbanayagam Sivaparan alias Nediyavan”; Rev.Fr. SJ Emmanuel Visuvanathan Ruthirakumaran (US citizen) Sekarampillai Vinayakamoorthy alias Vinayagam

The UN has a Counter Terrorism Committee, its head was recently in Sri Lanka. The Counter Terrorism Committee has been set up to monitor the implementation of the Resolution 1373 and States are given 90 days to respond regarding their progress. This is a perfect opportunity to share the details of the 16 LTTE fronts, their heads and the 424 individuals alongside their passport details, address, employers etc and get the Counter Terrorism Committee to follow up with the nations that these LTTE fronts/individuals are domiciled in. If the Committee functions as a compliance board for the Resolution 1373 Sri Lanka has a friend to go to. Not only must the war on terrorism be on paper and by public announcements, all ‘freedom fighters’ fondled during infancy stages of the insurgency ended up annihilating their masters and out of control or becoming orphans to surrogate nations willing to provide them better deals. Eventually, it is the common masses that end up at the receiving end and dead as victims. If there is sincerity in ridding the world of men, women and children holding arms and indoctrinated the kill there is a requirement for all nations to be open and pledge to eliminate terrorism. The best way the EU and members of Western nations can do to help Sri Lanka is to commence a joint investigation of all the LTTE fronts Sri Lanka has named, the leaders of these 16 LTTE fronts and the 424 individuals Sri Lanka has banned. It may be a long investigation but it is worthwhile starting and the investigators will soon find out how interconnected each are and will be able to also discover what they did with the funds raised

167

UNHRC INVESTIGATION ON SRI LANKA – REVISITING BAN KI MOONS PANEL OF EXPERT REPORT Annex ‘AM’ The OHCHR investigation against Sri Lanka led by outgoing UN chief Navi Pillay will attempt to use the platform given to reinforce the dubious, contradictory and controversial reports that have been compiled against Sri Lanka. One such forming the basis of successive Resolutions and Navi Pillay’s own reports is the Panel appointed by UN Secretary General to advise him on the accountability during the final stages of the war in Sri Lanka. It is a good time to look through and analyse the contents of this report starting off with its Executive Summary

The UN Secretary General’s Panel of Expert Report (Darusman Report)

• On 22 June 2010 the United Nations’ (UN) Secretary-General established a Panel of Experts on accountability in Sri Lanka” to advise him on accountability during the final stages of the war in Sri Lanka. (Note: TO ADVISE HIM / FINAL STAGES OF THE WAR) – within no time a report that was ‘to advise him’ became the ‘advise to all’ and the ‘final stages of the war’ has today included ongoing non-war related issues as well. It showcases an agenda against Sri Lanka.

• The LTTE was militarily defeated in May 2009 putting to an end 3 decades of terrorism by a terrorist outfit banned by 32 nations. LTTE were non-state actors as well as defined international terrorists.

• 21st May 2009, UN Secretary General arrives in Sri Lanka (barely days into the conclusion of the conflict)

• The 23rd May 2009 joint statement issued by the Sri Lankan Government via the Ministry of External Affairs and the UN Secretary General’s office had the following serious fallacies

http://www.mea.gov.lk/index.php/component/content/article/1753-joint-statement-by-the-gosl-a-the-un-at-the-conclusion-of-un-secretary-generals-visit-to-sri-lanka

7 At the conclusion of a terrorist conflict why was there any need to include reference to aspirations and grievances of all communities because the conflict that ended was one of TERRORISM that affected all communities and benefitted those working for and benefitting from terrorism?

8 Given that the statement does state ‘all communities’ why did the Sri Lankan authorities include reference to 13 th amendment and involvement of Tamil parties when there was no requirement to give special mention to one community and when Tamil parties have not been omitted from the democratic system of governance?

9 The conclusion of the joint statement was The Secretary General underlined the importance of an accountability process for addressing violations of international humanitarian and human rights law. The Government will take measures to address those grievances” (Nowhere does the Sri Lankan Government commit to undertaking an investigation nor does the GOSL agree to an international investigation)

On 15th May 2010, the Sri Lankan President appointed the LLRC with a mandate to investigate period 2002 February to 2009 May. Giving no respect to the GOSL’s domestic investigation initiative the UN Secretary General appoints a Panel of Experts in June

168

2010. (Why did the UNSG appoint a Panel of Experts in June 2010 when he was well aware that the GOSL had appointed the LLRC on 15th May 2010 – does the UNSG’s patience on Sri Lanka last only a MONTH)

It is important to note that the Panel of Expert appointment was neither a UN General Assembly mandated appointed nor a UN Security Council mandated appointed. The Panel of Experts was purely a decision made by the UN Secretary General who in her personal capacity has the right to call for such a report but HE DOES NOT have a right to make this report public. Not only has this report been made public it has been the foundation and basis on which numerous Resolutions against Sri Lanka has been formulated and the UNHRC chief herself has made her reports quoting the UN Panel of Experts. These are to be taken as irregularities and manipulation of the systems and unethical conduct against a member State.

LLRC appointed on 15th May 2010 and report submitted on 15th November 2011.

UNSG Panel appointed in Jun 2010 and report submitted on April 2011.

http://www.un.org/News/dh/infocus/Sri_Lanka/POE_Report_Full.pdf

ASPECTS OF THE PANEL’s MANDATE

The Panel’s mandate was to ADVISE the Secretary General on

modalities, applicable international standards, comparative experiences relevant to an accountability process

The Panel included Marzuki Darusman as Chair (Indonesia), Steven Ratner (US), Yasmin Sooka (South Africa)

The Panel began work on 16 September 2010 (3 months after its appointment)

The Panel’s mandate does not extend to fact finding or investigation

Sri Lanka’s conflict was categorized as an ARMED CONFLICT applicability of international humanitarian law and international human rights law.

Page (i) of the Panel report states that ‘the Panel applied the rules of international humanitarian and human rights law to the credible allegations involving both the primary actors in the war; that is the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE) and the Government of Sri Lanka. (UNSG’s Panel had placed a non-state actor & internationally banned terrorist outfit ON PAR with a democratically elected Government)

However the Panel while stating that the GOSL having signed international treaties were bound by them and expected to investigate violations did not commit itself to displaying how a terrorist outfit like the LTTE not bound by any international treaties would be held accountable?

Allegations by Panel of Experts

169

The Panel claims that contrary to the GOSL Sri Lanka stand that it pursued a ‘humanitarian rescue operation’ with ‘zero civilian casualties’, allegations ‘IF PROVED’ was indicative of violations of International humanitarian/human rights laws.

The Panel’s CREDIBLE ALLEGATIONS between September 2008 and 19 May 2009

Widespread shelling on Vanni populace causing largescale civilian deaths

330,000 civilians trapped (but kept hostage by LTTE)

GOSL silencing media and critics by intimidation and white vans

3 shellings on no-fire zone

Shelling UN hub, food distribution lines near ICRC ships coming to pick up wounded from the beaches.

Panel report page (ii) states that ‘most civilian casualties in the final phases of the war were caused by the government shelling’

Panel report page (ii) also states that

‘GOSL systematically shelled hospitals on the frontlines’.

All hospitals in the Vanni were hit by mortars and artillery (some hit repeatedly) despite them being known to the GOSL.

Systematically deprived people in the conflict zone of humanitarian aid (food and medical supplies, particularly surgical supplies)

purposely underestimated the number of civilians who remained in the conflict zone. Page (iii) of Panel report says ‘tens of thousands lost their lives from January to May 2009”.

The Panel report also accuses the Government of subjecting victims and survivors to further suffering

screening for LTTE took place without transparency or external scrutiny (with international NGOs placed in the North during reign of LTTE did any of them stop recruitment of children to the LTTE)

some were ‘summarily executed’ (who were summarily executed are not named)

some ‘MAY HAVE BEEN RAPED’ (there is a BIG difference in MAY HAVE BEEN and actually been raped – but the MAY HAVE BEEN gets ignored and the anti-SL lobby runs off with the ‘rape’ story)

The Report accuses the Government of detaining all IDPs in ‘closed camps’ (perhaps the intention was to enable all civilian-clad LTTE to escape)

Other accusations included ‘massive overcrowding’, ‘breaching basic social and economic rights’ (can UN give a single example of a Government opening banks inside a camp and enabling the IDPs to keep their jewellery in safety, or providing vocational training to IDPs, day care for kids and giving tuition to students studying for competitive exams!),

170

The Panel also says ‘MANY lives were lost unnecessarily’ (they do not give numbers or names and purposely omits to mention that those that died did so of fatigue and old age and their numbers are with the authorities)

The Panel also says ‘some persons in the camps were interrogated and subjected to torture’ (this is vague – who are the SOME, the Panel should report their names and give details of the torture they were subject to)

Panel comments on LTTE

‘LTTE refused civilian permission to leave’ (does this not satisfactorily lay all blame of subjecting civilians to unnecessary harm with the LTTE? – inspite of ICRC, other NGOs with the LTTE during the initial stages of the conflict were they able to remove a single civilian, even the aged?, did the LTTE listen to the UN or any other body and release civilians – NO)

LTTE used civilians as ‘hostages’ – is the GOSL to be blamed for this?

LTTE used civilians ‘at times using their presence as a strategic human buffer between themselves and the advancing Sri Lankan Army’ (if these ‘civilians’ were kept as virtual human shields and their status were not known to the advancing Sri Lankan Army, the army cannot be faulted for shooting for these civilians were put into harms way by the LTTE and these civilians were not in a civilian zone)

According to the Panel LTTE ‘implemented a policy of forced recruitment throughout the war’(does this not make any to wonder how many of the civilians were actually ‘civilians’ at the end of the war, if they were forcefully recruited)

The Panel also confirms that ‘in the final stages, (LTTE) greatly intensified its recruitment of people of all ages, including children as young as fourteen’ (let us note that 594 of the children were confirmed LTTE cadres and underwent rehabilitation, it is anyone’s guess again how many more children took part in combat and pretend to be civilians still. The same logic can be applied to civilians who would have also had to take part in hostilities and if so even without uniform in an armed conflict the army cannot be held culpable for their deaths)

The Panel has also added that the LTTE ‘forced civilians to dig trenches and other emplacements for their (LTTE) own defences’ (this activity in a categorized armed conflict removes the status of ‘civilian’ from the civilians)

The next part of the Panel report are its golden words that should be quoted by any response given by the GOSL. The Panel says that the LTTE in using civilians for non-civilian activities had contributed to ‘blurring the distinction between combatant and civilian exposing civilians to additional harm’. THE IMPORTANCE OF THIS STATEMENT IS INVALUABLE FOR ALL OF THE ALLEGATIONS OF HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS OF ‘CIVILIAN’ DEATHS BECOMES ERASED IF LTTE USED CIVILIANS AS COMBATANTS (digging trenches, as child soldiers, as combatants etc) In an armed conflict any civilian engaged in combat activities LOOSES their status as a civilian.

It is also pertinent that the Panel admits that the war was ‘clearly lost’. This places complete blame on the LTTE for keeping civilians against their will. If the Panel says ‘many civilians were sacrificed at the altar of the LTTE cause and its efforts to preserve its senior leadership’. This goes to show that the Panel admits that LTTE thought only of its own cadres and its senior leadership and

171

NOT the Tamil civilians. It also questions how does that fit in with the Panels own claim that ‘tens of thousands lost their lives from January to May 2009” (accusation against the GOSL).

The next piece of admission by the Panel is also noteworthy for all those pointing fingers at the GOSL. The Panel says ‘from February 2009 onwards the LTTE started point-blank shooting of civilians who attempted to escape the conflict zone, significantly adding to the death toll in the final stages of the war’ (do we not recall that the same Panel accused the GOSL of killing tens of thousands of people from January to May 2009?)

Also negating the accusation against the GOSL, the Panel in its report states that LTTE ‘fired artillery in proximity to large groups of internally displaced persons and fired from, or stored military equipment near, IDPs or civilian installations such as hospitals’. This contradicts with the Panels allegations that the GOSL were systematically shelling ALL the hospitals and its own statement that ‘most civilian casualties in the final phases of the war were caused by the government shelling’

The Panel goes on to add that ‘throughout the final stages of the war, the LTTE continued its policy of suicide attacks outside the conflict zone’ ….LTTE ‘perpetrated a number of attacks against civilians outside the conflict zone’.

Inspite of the above statements by the Panel against the LTTE, the Panel concludes that it has found ‘credible allegations that comprise 5 core categories of potential serious violations committed by the GOSL’

5 accusations against GOSL

6 killing of civilians through widespread shelling

7 shelling of hospitals and humanitarian objects

8 denial of humanitarian assistance

9 human rights violations suffered by victims and survivors of the conflict (including both IDPs and LTTE suspects)

10 human rights violations outside the conflict zone including against media and other critics of the Government.

In so far as items 1 to 4 are concerned, the Panel has by its own report shown that apart from making accusations against both to compile its report there is no hard evidence and the likelihood of he said/she said scenario arises. However, item 5 is totally outside the gamut of a conflict and the item should be taken for discussion or debate outside of the investigation that is on the last phase and crimes committed therein by both parties.

6 accusations against LTTE

7. using civilians as a human buffer

8. killing civilians attempting to flee LTTE control

172

9. using military equipment in the proximity of civilians

10. forced recruitment of children

11. forced labor

12. killing of civilians through suicide attacks

Now the all important questions are :

a) WITH THE DEATHS OF THE ENTIRE GROUND LEADERSHIP OF THE LTTE ALONG WITH ITS LEADER PRABAKARAN, WHO IS TO STAND ON THE DOCK AND CLAIM ACCOUNTABILITY FOR THE CRIMES COMMITTED BY THE LTTE?

b) IF OHCHR INVESTIGATORS ARE READY TO INVESTIGATE THOSE THAT HAD DIRECT LINKS WITH LTTE WOULD THEY BE HELD ACCOUNTABLE AND PUT ON THE DOCK?

The UN needs to answer this before we move anywhere, otherwise it would be a case of only hounding one party while the other gets away with a paper accusation and nothing more. LTTE’s crimes lasted 3 decades and not just during the last phase and certainly not conf ined to the 6 areas that the Panel has listed. There has to be justice for the victims of every day, every month and every year that LTTE put to death and there numbers are far more than the numbers quoted as deaths during the last stages.

The Panel’s ‘ACCOUNTABILITY’ heading (after the Executive Summary)

Says that violations of international humanitarian/human rights laws must be prosecuted under domestic and international law. In which case we again ask who will take the fall for LTTE crimes given that the ground LTTE is no more?

The Panel speaks of the need for reparations for victims – how can that be possible for an internationally banned terrorist outfit that has no legal status and is not signatory to any international treaties?

Another significant and noteworthy statement in the report is that the Panel in keeping with the United Nations policy does not advocate a ‘one-size-fits-all’ formula. That is in deed good news and the Panel also states that it does not advocate ‘importation of foreign models for accountability’. (this is good for some of Sri Lanka’s own advisors to take note of especially those attempting to copy the South African reconciliation model to Sri Lanka) Yet why has the Panel concluded that the Governments notion of accountability is not in accordance with international standards”. This adds to the Panels contradictory statements.

If the UN Secretary General’s panel says that it recognizes the need for the accountability process to be defined based on national assessments, involving broad citizen participation, needs and aspirations’, it is interesting to know what or who says there is no such taking place in Sri Lanka? Moreso it is an apt time to take a survey and let the international fraternity statistically come to terms with the truth that entities like CPA, Transparency Intl etc who they think as great sources of reference are entities with people that very few in Sri Lanka deem as

173

credible.

The report also states that the GOSL emphasized on RESTORATIVE justice while the panel deemed both restorative and retributive justice as equally important.

The Panel on Sri Lanka’s LLRC

The Panel that initially stated that it does not espouse a ‘one-size-fits-all’ formula once again repeats that the LLRC is ‘deeply flawed does not meet international standards for an effective accountability mechanism’ and does not satisfy with the joint commitment by the President of Sri Lanka and the UNSG. Repeated again is that there is no line in that agreement that claims Sri Lanka will investigate. (pl refer the joint statement)

The Panel on ‘Other Domestic Mechanisms’

The Panel after taking 10months to review Sri Lanka has concluded that

the panel has little confidence in the justice system

independence of Attorney General weakened

Emergency Regulations and Prevention of Terrorism Act obstructs judicial system

the panel has no confidence in the military court system carrying out crimes against final phase.

most commissions of inquiry have failed and recommendations rarely implemented

The Panel on ‘Other obstacles to Accountability’

1. Triumphalism on the part of the Government, expressed through its discourse on having developed the means and will to defeat ‘terrorism’ thus ending Tamil aspirations for political autonomy and recognition, (this statement is way off mark. When after 30 years a terrorist movement that killed not only military but civilians who were Sinhalese, Muslims, Tamils and even foreigners is finally defeated who does not celebrate? Let us not forget that a man the world came to know as the person behind the 9/11- a single incident without proof was killed while unarmed after US Navy Seals entered a country without informing the Government and lit crackers all night long – is that not triumphalism?. The next point is how dare the Panel claim that the end of ‘terrorism’ which the panel has purpose ly put in inverted commas to be compared with ending Tamil aspirations for political autonomy. Has the Panel not been given the list of over 250 Tamil leaders gunned down by the LTTE?

2. ongoing exclusionary policies, which are particularly deleterious as political, social and economic exclusion based on ethnicity, perceived or real, has been at the heart of the conflict. It would be good to have examples of where there is any such ongoing exclusionary policies legislatively, legally or constitutionally instead of making vague statements.

174

3. continuation of wartime measures, including not only Emergency Regulations and the Prevention of Terrorism Act, but the continued militarization of the former conflict zone and the use of paramilitary proxies all of which perpetuate a climate of fear, intimidation and violence. To answer this allegation let us wonder what if all the LTTErs that posed as civilians did not go through rehabilitation and continued to move around amongst the people and the Sri Lankan military did not bother to gather all hidden catchments of arms and ammunition, what would happen when these LTTE cadres with no leader, no money and no means of livelihood would do amongst their own if there were no military presence? The answer was found when 3 LTTErs posing as civilians had to eventually be gunned down!

4. restrictions on the media contrary to democratic governance and limit basic citizens rights – what are these restrictions?

5. role of the Tamil diaspora which provided vital and moral support to the LTTE over decades – if they are foreign passport holders it is for those governments to take up with them why they are supporting a terror group.

There is an uncanny shift throughout the report to take away reference to LTTE as a terror outfit and compare LTTE as representative of Tamil aspiration. This notion is fermented when the Panel states that ‘there should be a genuine commitment to a political solution that recognizes Sri Lanka’s ethnic diversity and the full and inclusive citizenship of all of its people, including Tamils as the foundation for the country’s future’. Lets also get something straight, there is no ethnic diversity. The population of Sri Lanka is 74% Sinhalese, 11% Tamil, 9% Muslims. Everyone is equal before the law. If anyone is treated different it is not because of ethnicity it is because they are rich or politically linked (whether they are in opposition or government and these links and rich include all the ethnic groups)

The Panel on ‘International role in the protection of civilians’

The Report states that the UN political organs and bodies failed to take actions that might have protected civilians during the final stages. Lets be practical, what does the Darusman, Ratner and Sooka expect the UN bodies to have done. Could they have gone inside the conflict zone and taken out the civilians and would the LTTE have waited and watched this happen. Let’s get real. There were ICRC presence, the UN convoys took food and medicines not one returned even with injured or elderly. That is not the failure of the UN staff but the reality that they were dealing with animals.

The Darusman Report : Recommendations

The paragraph on Recommendations ONLY requires complementary action by the GOSL and the UN and associatates.

Recommendation 1: Investigation

1. Domestic investigation into international humanitarian/human rights law committed by both sides involved in the armed conflict (Note it does not say last phase, thus the provision to include entire conflict has been left open)

2. Recommends that the UNSG establishes an independent international mechanism with a mandate to cover

3. monitor and assess how Sri Lanka is carrying out domestic accountability process and periodically advise the UNSG

175

4. conduct investigations independently into alleged violations

5. collect and safeguard information related to final stages of war

Recommendation 2: Immediate measures to advance accountability

A. GOSL to implement short term measures

1. End violence by the State, its paramilitaries and others tolerated by State

2. facilitate recovery of human remains to families and allow cultural rites of the dead

3. provide death certificates for the dead/missing (first they must have a name and a birth certificate too!)

4. facilitate psychosocial support for all survivors respecting their cultural values

5. release all displaced persons and facilitate their return to their former homes or provide for resettlement (all those who have not seen how the people in the Vanni were living may need a reality check because they should think twice before asking people to return to areas that have not been de-mined)

6. continue to provide interim relief to assist the return of all to normal life (the Darusman team needs to be given the list of provisions the GOSL provided to those who were eventually resettled.

B. GOSL to investigate and disclose the fate of all forcibly disappeared. GOSL must invite the Working Group of Enforced and Involuntary Disappearances to visit Sri Lanka. (Has the Darusman team given a list of all those they claim to be forcibly disappeared?)

C. GOSL should immediately repeal Emergency Regulations and modify provisions of the PTA that are inconsistent with Sri Lanka’s international obligations. The GOSL should take the following measures against suspected LTTE

a. publish their names with locations of their detention and notify legal basis of their detention (does the US give those held at Guantanamo Bay, Diego Garcia, Abu Ghraib prisons!)

b. All detainees access to family members and legal counsel

c. Allow detainees to question justification of their detention in a court

d. Charge those against whom there is sufficient evidence of serious crimes and release all others and allow them to reintegrate (let the Darusman team note that close to 12,000 such former LTTE cadres have been successfully reintegrated and are leading normal lives)

D. GOSL should end state violence and practices that limit freedom of movement, assembly and expression or contribute to climate

176

of fear (let is also be noted that during LTTE defacto rule there was no freedom of movement, now with the Tamil National Alliance heading the provincial council, the Chief Minister says Sinhalese are not welcome in the North, does anyone speak on behalf of Sinhalese right of movement?)

Recommendation 3: Longer term accountability measures

a. Sri Lanka should initiate process with strong civil society participation to examine the root cause of the conflict including ethno-nationalist extremities on both sides, the conduct of the war and patterns of violations and corresponding institutional responsibilities.

b. GOSL should issue a public, formal acknowledgement of its role in and responsibility for extensive civilian casualties in the final stages of the war (this is going overboard because much of the detail on the LTTE by the Panel suffices to show that the mayhem was caused by LTTE and civilian deaths were as a result of LTTE too) This statement is totally out of line.

c. GOSL should institute a reparations program to international standards for all victims (what about those that the Panel confirms were deaths as a result of LTTE?)

Recommendation 4: United Nations

1. UNHRC should reconsider May 2009 Resolution regarding Sri Lanka (A/HRC/S-11/L.1/Rev.2)

UNSG to conduct a comprehensive review of UN system during the war in Sri Lanka and after SUBMISSION TO OHCHR INVESTIGATION ON SRI LANKA (OISL) Annex ‘AN’ The membership of our Organizations consist exclusively of New Zealand citizens and residents of Sri Lankan origin and have been representing their interests locally and internationally during a period spanning the last 25 years or so. Although our objectives are varied, we in unison agree that Sri Lanka should unite as one nation irrespective of race, religion, linguistic or ethnic differences in order to emerge as a modern developed nation and achieve prosperity. Introduction

This submission is in response to the invitation extended by the OISL from individuals, organisations and governments to submit information and/or documentation on alleged serious violations and abuses of human rights and related crimes allegedly perpetrated from 21 February 2002 until 15 November 2011 in Sri Lanka by either of the parties to the armed conflict.

177

The above time frame is co-terminal with the period selected by the LLRC (Sri Lanka’s Lessons Learnt and Reconciliation Commission) for their investigation. However, we believe that the objectives of the two investigations are different to each other. LLRC mandate is to find out the lessons learnt from the events unfolded during the ceasefire and the final armed conflict which may be suited to its specific purposes. However, in our view, it is not justifiable to stipulate the same time frame to an international investigation of alleged violations of human rights and related crimes during a long drawn armed conflict. It could be interpreted as a partisan action by OHCHR on behalf of one party to the conflict. The Liberation Tigers of Tamil Elam (LTTE), an international terrorist outfit that earned the sobriquet of the most ruthless gang of terrorists” were committing heinous crimes against innocent people in Sri Lanka continuously for about 20 years since 1983 and slowed down its open hostilities exactly on 21 February 2002 due to the ceasefire agreement. Even a cursory glance at the list of crimes committed by LTTE is sufficient to realise the unfairness of the selection of this period. It is highly unfair by the people who were subjected to atrocities and died at the hands of LTTE before 2002. For the families of the people who died at the hands of LTTE before 21 February 2002 whose most basic human right – the right to life were blatantly violated; this exclusion is a gross denial of rights of equality before the law and an impingement on freedom of expression and amounts to discrimination. A brief list of crimes committed by LTTE is given at the end to highlight our point. Please note that it is just a short list of incidents selected randomly due to page restrictions. The complete list of crimes could be submitted if necessary. However, we note that OISL’s indication that it may take into consideration any contextual and other relevant information that may fall outside this time frame in order to understand the events better. Our submission is not to highlight specific incidents but to apprise the OISL of the common feelings of the Sri Lankan people. Hence, we will not strictly adhere to a time frame. We are in total agreement with the OHCHR definition that non-state groups exercising de-facto control over parts of a state’s territory must respect human rights obligations of persons in that territory”. By looking at the list of atrocities the LTTE has committed during the past 30 years outside their area of de-facto control, we firmly believe that they should also be included to bring justice to the victims of such acts. Therefore, in our approach to the issue in question we have included the crimes executed against the civilian population in all parts of Sri Lanka. Background

We sincerely believe that the intention of the Office of the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights and other international organisations is to support the Sri Lankan nation to achieve unity and prosperity and to create an environment for all citizens to pursue their lives in peace. The events under investigations are related to the so called ethnic conflict” in Sri Lanka which can be traced as far back as two thousand years. The historical chronicles are full of such information.

178

If the UN and other international organizations have a genuine interest to create a peaceful environment and achieve a long lasting unity among all communities in Sri Lanka, they should foster a dialogue among all stakeholders without any outside interference. It may be a long process, but that is the only way. A piecemeal investigation like the present one will not achieve any meaningful result. Perhaps it may prove to be counterproductive and create more animosity among the communities jeopardising the reconciliation process unfolding in Sri Lanka which appears to be making progress, albeit rather slowly. Within the limited space allowed we would like to highlight some salient points in the Sri Lankan history where conflicts with foreign powers have been dealt with either militarily or by peaceful means. We wish to emphasise the point that the culture and psyche of the Sri Lankan people have been moulded by these historical events. Relegating these as mere history would be a colossal mistake leading to stupendous underestimation of the values upheld by the Sri Lankan nation with a recorded history spanning more than 2500 years. Five centuries of European (Western) influence to change those value systems have failed so far and we commend that OISL should be mindful of such realities before arriving at conclusions. This fact has to be considered especially against the background of the regional composition of the countries that have been parties to these UN resolutions. Historical facts.

The main catalysts for ethnic issue in Sri Lanka were foreign invasions. They were from India, Portugal, Holland and Britain. History of Sri Lanka is a summation of how the people in this island confronted foreign forces who invaded militarily, economically

and/or spiritually. Although military invasions have been resisted and eventually defeated, some spiritual interventions have been embraced and even

nurtured. Almost all military interventions have been recorded in great details and most of the facts have been confirmed by archaeologists and

historians after extensive research. “The first Dravidian attack on Ceylon recorded in the chronicles is said to have been led by Sena and Guttika, described as merchant

mariners who dealt in horses from Sindu region of India. Another Dravidian leader, Elara, invaded the Island and captured power at Anuradhapura. Elara, who is said to have come from the Cola country (Coromandel Coast of India) had a reputation for impartial justice. He was vanquished in a battle by a prince called Dutthagamani from the Sinhalese royal house ruling over the south eastern part of the island in 161 B.C and brought the whole island under his rule. This battle has an extremely important place in the Sinhalese culture and even today has a magical power to unite the whole community.

The nation’s inherent respect for human rights is vividly illustrated in the way how the vanquished was treated by the winning Sinhala

King Dutthagamani after the Battle of Vijithapura. The victorious Sinhala King ordered the Tamil King Elara’s dead body to be given the

179

honours appropriate to a Chakravartin (Emperor) monarch and, after cremating the body with appropriate funeral rites, on the spot where the redoubtable warrior fell, he caused a monument ( Caitya) to be erected there. Moreover he ordained that all music must cease whenever anyone passed the monument, which injunction was honoured even seven hundred years afterwards when the historical chronicle Mahavamsa was written.

Nurtured by the long history and the stories of struggle for independence from foreign domination the majority Sri Lankan community

would rise against and oppose any attempt to divide the country at any cost. The kings and military leaders who have led the battles against the invaders are revered by the people and as national heroes. Any

attempt to discredit or belittle them would not be taken lightly by the population and that fact should be taken seriously when during any investigations.

The Sri Lankans are aware that unlike Indian invaders, all three European invaders have deceived them by signing treaties at the

beginning and breaching them in practice. Both Portuguese and Dutch wanted only a trade post, but ended up ruling the majority of the country for about 300 years between them. British came and signed an International Treaty between the King of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and the People of Kandy. But the British Colonial Government did not observe the terms of this Treaty and when the Kandyan people rose up in protest in 1817, the uprising was ruthlessly and inhumanely crushed. All historical records point out that the British used a scorched earth policy including mass murder and genocide of innocent Sinhala civilians to crush this rebellion.

John Davy, in his work ” An Account of the Interior of Ceylon” gives a detailed account of the 1817 uprising and says ” The loss of the

natives, killed in the field or executed, or that died of disease and famine can hardly be calculated; it was, probably ten times greater than ours, and may have amounted, perhaps, to 10,000. . When one considers this rebellion and its consequences, one almost regrets that we ever entered the Kandyan Country. Considering that the population of the Central Province in 1818-1820 was only 150,000, clearly this can be considered as genocide of unprecedented proportions”.

Governor Robert Brownrigg issued a gazette notification on 01 January 1818 condemning all 17 who rebelled against the British,

termed them ‘traitors’, and confiscated their properties. They were declared ‘Rebels, Outlaws and Enemies of the British’. (It took over 180 years for the Sri Lankan Government to recognize them as ‘National Heroes’, who fought for the sovereignty of the country).

Portuguese arrived in Sri Lanka ( Ceylon) on 15 November 1505. The reigning monarch at the time with his seat of Government in

Kotte, allowed them to setup a trading post in Colombo when assured that their purpose was only trade. They gradually extended their authority in the country by intrigue, intimidation, treachery and deceit. After sometimes they made the Sinhala King their puppet and forced him to agree to be a vassal and pay tribute and later hand over the Kingdom to Portuguese.

It is said that every stage of the progress of Portuguese in Sri Lanka was marked by rapacity, bigotry, cruelty and an inhumanity

unparalleled in the annals of any other European power. ( Most of the historical data on that era are in the two volumes ” Ceylon the

180

Portuguese Era” written by Paul E Pieris, one of the eminent Sri Lankan historian. The principal source of information for his works was from a Portuguese historian Fernao de Queyroz.) The only “civilised way’ to regain the sovereignty of the country at that time was to fight a war, not because of the fault of Sri Lankans but because of the treachery and cruelty of the Portuguese. Several battles have been fought to regain sovereignty of the country from Portuguese and they appear to be similar to the battles in Sri Lanka between 1983 and 2009.

It is no wonder the Sri Lankan people are reluctant to trust Europeans given the past misdeeds perpetrated by them. Sri Lankan history has ample evidences that the people of the island have trusted and treated the visitors whether they were Indians, Portuguese, Dutch or British with due respect. Treaties had been signed with good faith. Unfortunately, all visitors eventually became invaders and betrayed the trust of Sri Lankans. Given the fact that majority of the signatories to the recent UN Resolutions are European Nations, Sri Lankans cannot be blamed if they mistrust the intentions and out rightly reject these investigations. Recent Ethnic Conflict in Sri Lanka

We have to emphasise that the recent ethnic conflict has many facets. Whatever differences we may have in between different ethnic groups, we do not oppose the process of negotiation. However, efforts to force a solution by an armed struggle would not be tolerated by anyone. Some relevant facts:

Although started as an ethnic conflict, it clearly transformed into a separatist war to divide the country and create a separate state. Under British rule, the first members of the 1833 Legislative Council were one from each community: One Sinhalese, One Tamil and

One Burgher. ( At that time there was no claim for a separate state from Tamil leaders.) Donoughmore Reforms in 1920s recommended universal franchise. (Tamil leaders opposed it and insisted on elections on communal

basis. However, there was no claim for a separate state.) At Soulbury Commission sittings in 1945 the Tamil Leaders demanded 50-50 scheme which was rejected by the Commission. (Again,

there was no claim for separate State.) One section of the Tamil leaders accepted the decision of the Soulbury Commission; The leader of the Tamil party joined the Sinhalese

and others. However, the deputy leader SJV Chelvanayakam opted to campaign for a federal state. One of the main demands at the time of independence was to grant Sri Lanka citizenship to the Tamil estate workers of Indian origin

(indentured South Indian Labour), which was amicably negotiated and settled on a staggered basis with India to the satisfaction of all. In late 1970s the Tamil leaders started claiming a state of Tamil Eelam alleged to be in existence in 13th century. Sinhalese vehemently

opposed and claimed it was baseless.

181

In 1980’s LTTE declared the launch of armed struggle to set up a Tamil Eelam. Since 1983, LTTE carried out barbaric acts of violence throughout the Island by attacking villages, unarmed farmers, Buddhist priests,

sacred shrines of Buddhist faith, economic targets and murdered a large number of Tamil and Sinhala Politicians and civilian and religious persons. Suicide bombers killed one elected Head of State (President), maimed another elected President in office and killed a number of Cabinet Ministers from both Sinhala and Tamil communities.

Government’s 1985 Talks with all the Tamil parties held in Thimpu, Bhutan. Then LTTE came up with more demands such as Traditional Homelands of Tamils in Sri Lanka.

In 1987, Indo-Lanka Peace Accord signed and more political powers were granted to provinces. None of the above stopped the violence. Several rounds of talks started with LTTE by successive Sri Lankan Government with no avail.

LTTE continued with their effort to carve out a separate state within the island by an arms struggle. They just used the peace talks to get themselves armed.

In 2002 a ceasefire agreement was reached with LTTE but it surreptitiously used to get them armed for a bigger assault. The report of

the Sri Lanka Monitoring Mission ruled that LTTE has violated the agreement on 3827 occasions with in five years. ( The Official Sri Lanka Monitoring Mission Report 2002-2008)

In 2006, the Sri Lankan Government had no other option but to take LTTE head on to bring about a stop the violent terrorist activities

including large scale killings committed by them. That ended on 19 May 2009 with the defeat of LTTE after the ” Battle of Pudumatalan”. The elusive peace finally dawned on Sri Lanka. All economic and social indicators now show that all corners of Sri Lanka are cruising

along the path of development. The Tamil leaders in Sri Lanka have openly declared that they have abandoned the idea of Eelam. Reconciliation is the dream of all communities living in Sri Lanka now.

Epilogue After nearly thirty years of unrest there is no doubt that all sections of the Sri Lankan population are now enjoying a peaceful life. Gone are the days when people set out from their homes in the morning not knowing whether they will be able to return home to their loved ones due to the atrocities of LTTE. Just like in the history, people of all communities are praising the leaders and the armed forces for bringing peace to their lives and restoring their right to life and saving their beloved motherland from the threats of a division and separation on ethnic lines.

182

Strangely enough, it is the first time in the long history of Sri Lanka, an international body is trying to investigate the violation of human rights during a conflict emanating from an act of armed terrorism. We strongly hold the view that if such an exercise is deemed to be required, it should benefit all stake holders. If by any chance it is a partisan exercise to appease a section of the international community, the repercussions will be disastrous. People will lose their confidence on the system of justice and that will encourage the violators of human rights to go berserk. Therefore, we commend that the investigators should consider such eventualities that may arise out of this exercise. The lists of atrocities at the end of this submission will give an indication how the LTTE has violated one of the most valuable human rights, the Right to Life, for thirty years. The fact that the disappearance of violence and killings after the end of the Battle of Pudumatalan” gives an indication how the disappearance of LTTE has helped to restore the human right, the Right to Life”. Even at the expense of repetition we would like to emphasize that the culture and religions of the Sri Lankan people are interwoven with the history of the country. Historical background has a heavy impact on the culture and psyche of the Sri Lankan society irrespective of their race and religion. At the end of the world war two, when countries assembled in San Francisco to punish Japan, Sri Lanka stood up and urged the big powers to forget the past and treat Japan as one of us. Even after the lapse of 67 years the sentiment expressed by Sri Lanka reverberates. When the present Prime Minister of Japan visited Sri Lanka a few weeks ago, he reminded the world what Japan owes Sri Lanka. We believe that Sri Lanka should reiterate that sentiment and remind the United Nations that after the uprisings in Sri Lanka in 1971 and 1989 tens of thousands of youth were rehabilitated and released to the community. All have become low abiding citizens of Sri Lanka and have contributed immensely to the development of the country. During the last five years, after the end of war in 2009, Sri Lanka has rehabilitated more than 500 child soldiers and nearly 11,000 LTTE cadres and released them to the society. There is no doubt that the reconciliation effort would also be enhanced by such initiatives. Sri Lanka has demonstrated such qualities in their society to the world as early as 161 B.C. and has continued until now. United Nations also must find a suitable methodology to treat and rehabilitate the people involved in conflicts. Engaging with the people on any possible violations of human rights, work with them and educate them is more effective than investigations with questionable intentions. Prepared By Mahinda Attanayake President – New Zealand Society for Peace, Unity and Human Rights in Sri Lanka (SPURNZ) Ananda Weerasinghe Editorial Committee – New Zealand Society for Peace, Unity and Human Rights in Sri Lanka (SPURNZ) Some of the attacks carried out by LTTE on civilian targets ( Selected randomly) Serial No: Date Location Killed Wounde Description

183

d

1 14/05/1985 Sri Maha BodhiyaAnuradhapura

120 85 LTTE massacred Buddhist devotees at the Sri Maha Bodhiya

2 11/06/1986 Trincomalee 22 75 Killing of a large group of people in a bomb explosion in a bus at Inner Harbour Road – Trincomalee

3 22/07/1986 Mamaduwa – Vavuniya 32 2 Terrorists exploded a landmine on a civilian bus

4 17/04/1987 Habarana – Trincomalee 127 44 LTTE massacred 96 civilians and 31 SF personnel who were travelling in a passenger bus

5 21/04/1987 Central Bus stand -Pettah, Colombo

106 295 The LTTE exploded a car bomb at the Pettah Bus Stand

6 02/06/1987 Aranthalawa – Ampara 35 14 Massacre of 31 Buddhist Priests and 04 civilians

7 06/10/1987 Valachchenai – Batticaloa

40 0 LTTE set fire to Batticaloa mail train

8 07/10/1987 Lahugala – PotuvilAmpara

30 0 The LTTE killed 30 civilians travelling in a passenger bus from Moneragala to Potuvil

9 19/10/1987 Kalkudha – Batticaloa 40 24 LTTE exploded a landmine 10 09/11/1987 Maradana – Colombo 23 106 Vehicle bomb explosion opposite Zahira College

11 01/05/1988 Sittaru / Kantalai – Trincomalee

26 35 Terrorists exploded a landmine on a civilian bus

12 14/11/1988 Peniketiyawa -Trincomalee

28 2 Terrorists ambushed a civilian bus

13 13/04/1989 Centre Road – Trincomalee

51 43 A car bomb explosion

14 03/08/1990 Kathankudy – Batticaloa 147 70 Terrorists massacred Muslim devotees at a Mosque 15 06/08/1990 Ampara area 34 0 Terrorists killed civilians working in a paddy field

16 10/04/1992 Ampara 28 36 A bomb exploded in a private bus which was parked at the Ampara bus stand

17 24/10/1994 Thotalanga Junction – Colombo

54 72 A suicide bomb explosion

18 07/08/1995 Independence Square -Colombo

23 40 A suicide cadre pushing a cart fixed with a bomb exploded it at the gate of the Ministerial office of the Western Province Chief Minister

19 31/01/1996 Colombo 80 1200 A large group of people were killed in a bomb explosion in front of the Central Bank

20 24/07/1996 Dehiwala – Colombo 57 356 Bomb explosion on the Alutgama train at Dehiwala station

184

21 05/03/1998 Maradana – Colombo 36 270 Vehicle bomb explosion near Maradana Police Station

22 29/09/1998 Jaffna 54 0 LTTE attack on a passenger aircraft belonging to Lion Air Flight killing 54 civilians including the crew

23 20/11/1999 Madhu Church Complex – Mannar

38 66 Terrorists fired small arms and mortars on the Madhu Church Complex

24 07/06/2000 Ratmalana – Colombo 24 60 A large group of people were killed in a LTTE suicide mission

25 02/10/2000 Mutur – Trincomalee 27 46

A suicide bomber riding a bicycle strapped with explosives drove into a three wheeler carrying Mr.Mohamad Latiff Baithullah , a PA candidate , killing a large group of people

26 15/06/2006 Kebitigollewa – Anuradhapura

64 87

LTTE has exploded 02 claymore mines targeting a passenger bus transporting approximately 160 passengers from villages of Viharahalmillewa, Halmillawetiya,Yakawewa and Talgaswewa to Kebitigollewa . In the explosion 01 soldier,15 Home Guards and 48 civilians were killed and 01 soldier and 86 civilians were injured.

27 16/01/2008 Okkampitiya – Moneragala

27 65

Blasting of a claymore mine follwed by shooting LTTE terrorists targeted a passenger bus which was plying from Okkampitiya to Buttala in the general area of Weliara.

28 25/04/2008 Piliyandala – Colombo 27 67 A bomb explosion using a remote control device took place inside a crowded passenger bus plying between Piliyandala and Kahapola.

29 06/06/2008 Katubedda – Colombo 23 28

Blasting of a claymore mine targeting a private passenger bus proceeding towards Mount Lavinia from Kottawa between Shilabimbaramaya Temple and the University of Moratuwa

30 06/10/2008 Anuradhapura 27 84

An LTTE male suicide bomber exploded himself killing Major General K J C Perera RWP RSP VSP USP rcds Psc (Retd), leader of the opposition North central Provincial Council, and 26 other persons and injuring 84 persons during a function held to declare open the new UNP office in Anuradhapura

185

We have records of nearly 150 such attacks. There were hundreds of attacks on economic targets and hundreds of premeditated assassinations. Details are available, but not included due to page restrictions. SUBMISSION TO OISL Annex ‘AP’ INTRODUCTION Since the war in Sri Lanka against the Tamil terrorist group LTTE ended, and particularly since the UN Secretary General’s Panel of Experts report (Darusman Report) was published in 2011, there has been a spate of accusations of genocide against GOSL. They have been from a range of NGOs such as Amnesty International, a number of western governments, some authors such as Gordon Weiss and Frances Harrison[1] as well as parts of the United Nations itself, mainly the High Commissioner for Human Rights. In these allegations the number of civilian deaths during the last stages of the war range from 40,000 in the Darusman Report to 150,000 in Harrison’s study. GOSL has vehemently and persistently protested at these claims. At the same time a range of new independent research and surveys has emerged which cast severe doubts on the veracity of the death toll calculations and have presented more plausible alternative estimates. These studies include two reports by University Teachers for Human Rights (UTHR (J) a group of Tamil teachers based in the Jaffna University[2], Independent Diaspora Analysis Group’s The Numbers Game: Politics of Retributive Justice[3], and Marga Institute and Consortium of Humanitarian Agencies publication, Issues and Accountability relating to the Last Stages of the War in Sri Lanka: Narrative iii[4]. These are in addition to the report of a Presidential Commission, of eminent jurists,- Lessons Learnt and Reconciliation Commission Report (LLRC)[5], produced following widespread consultations in different parts of the country. There were also a number of other well-researched articles, as well as a Sri Lankan Census Department’s Enumeration of Vital Events[6]. But the main interlocutors completely ignored these inconvenient reports. Furthermore, when the LLRC invited the INGOs, who were claiming massive HR breaches by GOSL, to give evidence, they refused en masse. The rejection was inexcusable but understandable. None of the critics was paid to find the truth or the fairness of accusations: they were paid to achieve an objective, which was to pursue human rights violators among the weaker nations. Also, the information met all their needs. So why look a gift horse in the mouth? Sadly, the position taken by the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights was no different from that of other critics. With that bitter five year experience the position taken by GOSL not to support the investigation is understandable. We are making this submission in the belief that the expert panel which consists of two world renowned jurists and a Nobel Peace Prize winner will not wish to associate their names with yet another biased and unfounded litany of allegations to reinforce predetermined positions, while turning a blind eye to the mass of evidence that contradicts the long held stance of the powerful lobby. Instead, we hope, the experts take a more judicious and impartial position to evaluate the evidence on both sides of the argument in undertaking the investigation, as professed, to be guided at all times by the principles of independence, impartiality, objectivity, transparency, integrity and do no harm”. Such an impartial enquiry only will restore the faith of smaller nations in the UN system.

186

BACKGROUND The terrorist problem that plagued Sri Lanka for over three decades was very complex. To understand it, it is essential to learn its background. Unfortunately, most critics who have written at length on it have not attempted to understand these intricacies. There are several factors worth noting. The first relates to the position of Tamils within the Sri Lankan population. Of the 20 million living in the country, Sinhalese comprise 76 per cent and Tamils account for 11 per cent. This immediately evokes the a priori conclusion that in that situation the minority must be discriminated against. But the truth is quite different. Ever since the British colonised Sri Lanka in 1796 they nurtured an English educated class of Tamils in the north of the country as part of the ‘divide and rule’ policy as applied in most of its colonies. The country was administered in English and Jaffna was well endowed with good schools. For instance, the northern region with less than half a million Tamils, had two well equipped grade one schools while whole of the rest of the country, with over 15 million people, had just one, and that was in Colombo. Altogether, about ten per cent of the population was English educated and they formed the elite class that ran the country. Results of this were predictable. Of all the coveted university courses such as medicine, engineering and commerce, often over 50 per cent of students were Tamil, in spite of the fact that they were only 11 per cent of the population. This favoured position continues to this day although with less intensity with the opening up of more universities. These facts could be verified from the data produced by the Census and Statistics Department and universities. Then abruptly the situation changed in 1956. SWRD Bandaranaike who became Prime Minister that year made Sinhalese the official language with Tamil as a regional language. And later Tamil also became an official language. The shift opened up the public service and other technical areas to massive competition from the Sinhalese educated who were virtually disenfranchised before. Tamils interpreted this loss of privilege as discrimination. In fact the discrimination was against the Sinhalese and Bandaranaike only corrected the anomaly that had existed for centuries. That was the beginning of the claims of discrimination by Tamils. This is not to deny there were issues affecting Tamils but none requiring resort to terrorism. But terrorism thrived in the north for another reason. The amicable relations Bandaranaikes had with the closest neighbour India led by the Gandhi’s ended with west-leaning JR Jayewardene assuming power in 1977. To prevent Sri Lanka following a foreign policy opposed by India and bring about some control on its behaviour, Indian Prime Minister Indira Gandhi worked out a way to destabilise Sri Lanka by exploiting the Tamil discontent. She set up over 30 camps in different parts of India in the early 1980s to train, arm and fund Tamil terrorists from Sri Lanka[7]. The idea was to eventually unleash them in Sri Lanka. Rajiv Gandhi who succeeded her after her assassination in 1984 pursued the same policy until 1991 when he too was assassinated by a LTTE suicide bomber. In the meantime Tamil Nadu state in India with 72 million Tamils and separated from Sri Lanka’s north only by 30 km of sea, continued to provide a safe haven for LTTErs who attacked Sri Lankan soldiers and escaped by boat. Thus terrorism thrived in Sri Lanka.

187

In 1983, a debacle by the Jayewardene regime, which was slow in responding to gangs attacking Tamils living in Colombo, saw a mass exodus of Tamils to Western countries as refugees. Some of them were well placed in commerce and industry while others resorted to criminal activity such as human trafficking, credit card fraud and drug smuggling. They comprised the Tamil Diaspora in the west, which by 2000 had swelled to almost a million who contributed significant funds to support the LTTE led by Velupillai Prabhakaran. Jane’s Defence Weekly estimates that annually the LTTE received over $300 million from them[8]. Most of it was used to buy arms. At the peak of power, in 2004, the LTTE controlled 15,000 km2 of land area and had carried out 378 suicide bombings. It was the only terrorist group to kill two world leaders – Rajiv Gandhi former Indian Prime Minister and Ranasinhghe Premadasa, President of Sri Lanka. It also killed 8000 innocent Tamils considered traitors by the LTTE[9]. All told, over 100,000 civilians, men, women and children had been driven to their grave by the LTTE during its 30-year reign of terror. When seven successive Sri Lankan governments failed to bring about peace it was clear the government was the underdog. Prabhakarn knew this and in August 2006 launched the Eelam war IV” on the newly elected President Rajapaksa who, he considered a lame duck. With that he expected to wrest control of north and east of the country to set up a separate state (eelam). But Rajapaksa, slowly and methodically managed to end the carnage three years later in 2009. LTTE’s success was partly the power of its propaganda, which helped to portray the world’s deadliest terror group” as described by FBI, as freedom fighters in the western minds, and partly its ability to acquire modern armaments, including kitset aircraft, to fight an army severely demoralised and mismanaged by southern political leaders. Conventional wisdom is that a picture cannot lie. Capitalising on this belief, the LTTE used modern technology of ‘cut and paste’ very effectively to spread misinformation. Tech savvy Tamil terrorists portrayed powerful images of how they were being tortured by government soldiers. For instance Tamils, who were mostly Hindu, mutilate their own bodies to show devotion to their gods. At Kovil functions one often finds young Tamils hanging from hooks pierced through their skin, as penance. These very same pictures were presented as torture inflicted by Sri Lankan soldiers. Yet another instance was when a picture of a smiling LTTE leader Prabhakaran reading a newspaper, which carried a banner headline Prabhakaran is dead” appeared in the LTTE newspaper. This was an actual headline that appeared in the daily newspapers the day after the war ended. But at that time his body had not been recovered and the terrorists wanted to tell their followers he was still alive. The next day however the body was found and the picture was removed from the website. There were also several YouTube videos of people dressed in army uniforms executing civilians. You see shots being fired and a naked man fall into a pit. But the directing was so bad that these so-called Sinhalese soldiers spoke in Tamil with each other in the mock execution. But a foreigner deeply shaken seeing the heinous event will not notice the difference. In more recent times Frances Harrison presented a ‘documentary’ on BBC how Tamils are regularly tortured and raped by Sri Lankan soldiers. As doctors testified they were not fakes but actual scars of torture on the bodies of these victims. Then it was discovered that the scars were indeed real but they were inflicted not in Sri Lanka but in the back streets of London at a heavy financial cost to the victim to help gain residency in the UK[10] Nandani, the main victim” in the video had in fact got UK residency on the strength of the documentary which had been produced to discredit Sri Lanka to coincide with CHOGM held there end of last year. That is only one of many fake videos still available on YouTube.

188

For an average person it is difficult to imagine such manipulation of the media. Knowingly or unknowingly the western media continue to show the clips over and over to drum up support whenever an international meeting on Sri Lanka was about to take place. Promoting itself by fair or foul means was essential for the LTTE to promote its cause. And when it all ended abruptly in 2009 with a six billion dollar investment up in smoke and a dream of a separate state shattered, the Tamil Diaspora had enough cause to continue with the propaganda for retribution and rebuilding. But several other groups and activists joined to support them for different reasons. For instance some powerful NGOs like Amnesty International, to bolster their funding base[11] and politicians to beef up their vote banks[12]. Some of them also may have been there for genuine concern as the propaganda was powerful and touching. The call for submissions by the Darusman Panel against Sri Lanka had received hardly any input and it had to extend the deadline twice. Then the Panel made the declaration that almost all its records, written and oral material will be embargoed for 20 years from the day of the release of the report in March 2011. Even after the lapse of 20 years, declassification review would have to be undertaken prior to the release of material signifying that some of the information would never be released. Along with that announcement the Diaspora posted a set of sample submissions in the Internet. Then the submissions flooded in. Some of it had to be fabrications with impunity for the LTTE agents in capitals went door-to-door and email-to-email urging people to fill the blank spaces in the sample submissions. The Diaspora reeling from the defeat found this a godsend for revenge. That allowed the Darusman Panel to conclude that it had received credible allegations, which if proven, indicate that a wide range of serious violations of international humanitarian law and international human rights law had taken place”. But the irony is, to this day, GOSL does not know what that credible evidence was. And it will never know. Does it sound like a Kangaroo Court? But the practice has not ceased. The same action of making fake submissions to the current UNHRC enquiry is taking place as found by the police when they arrested a person tasked by the main Tamil political party in Sri Lanka, Tamil National Alliance (TNA), to collect signatures on blank ‘UN war crimes complaints forms’ in the northern region. At the time of the arrest, the suspect had six signed blank ‘UN war crimes complaints forms.’[13] This may be only the tip of the iceberg, for the method was widely used by the diaspora for the 2011 enquiry and hard to imagine they will not do it again. THE NUMBER OF CIVILIANS KILLED The main accusation against Sri Lanka is that it allegedly killed a large number of civilians indiscriminately, estimates ranging from 40,000 in the Darusman report to 150,000 in Frances Harrison’s book. How plausible are these numbers? Sadly none of the critics accusing Sri Lanka has bothered to check the authenticity of the data on which the serious allegations were based. Perhaps it is a sign of the fast moving times where people have no time to check information which especially others had already accepted, while ‘cut and paste’ was so freely and speedily available. Perhaps they had genuinely believed the propaganda videos. Or perhaps the information as it was, suited their purposes well. Whatever it is, this lack of scrutiny of the assumptions had resulted in a grave injustice to Sri Lanka. This is despite the fact that researchers, technical experts, analysts and writers have presented ample evidence of the unreliability of the information. So how plausible are those numbers? We examine it under eight categories:

189

• Deaths to injury ratio

Missing from all the calculations of civilian deaths was an immutable fact of war – the ratio of dead to the wounded. This was first highlighted in a groundbreaking study in the British Medical Journal (BMJ) in 1999, which examined casualty ratios in wars from 1940 to 1988[14]. The study showed that the number of people wounded is at least twice the number killed and may be 13 times as high” depending on the conflict type, weapons used and other factors. The table below provides data on some of the death toll estimates. It is worth noting that the two sources that were on the ground and meticulously collected the data –the UN country group in Sri Lanka and the census carried out by the Department of Census and Statistics have almost similar number of civilian deaths. All other calculations were based on University Teachers for Human Rights (Jaffna) (UTHR(J) Reports 32 and 34 which were based on a simple calculation subtracting the 290,000+ in IDP camps from the total population claimed to be 330,000 in the second No-Fire-Zone in February 2009. And that methodology and the basic data became the basis for the calculations of others that followed. In other words, the accuracy of the estimate on which Sri Lanka is accused of mass killing of innocent civilians and the need for an international investigation is based on:

a) the accuracy of the figure of 330,000 as the number of people who lived there in February 2009 and b) the ability to differentiate between combatants and non-combatants from the total fatalities.

With regard to a) the figure of 330,000 came from a situation report made to the Ministry of Public Administration & Home Affairs by the AGA for the Mullaitivu district, Mr. K. Parthipan, on March 5, 2009. Parthipan was still trapped inside the second No-Fire-Zone along with the – Different civilian casualty calculations

Casualties Time period

Casualty Type

Number Dead & Missing

Number wounded Actual

wounded predicted on basis of deaths

KIA to WIA Ratio

Data Source

Aug 08 to May 09

Tamil civilians

7,721 18,479 1.3 United Nations in Sri Lanka, May 2009(1)

Jan-May 2009 Tamil Civilians

40,000 120,000 1:3 Darusman Report, March 2011 (2)

190

Late 2008 to May 2009

Tamil Civilians

26,000 to 146,679

78,000 to 440,037

1:3

‘Still Counting the Dead’ F.Harrison, Oct. 2012 (3)

Late 2008-May 2009

Tamil Civilians

10,000 to 40,000

30,000 to 120,000

1:3 The Cage”. G, Weiss, May 2011 (4)

Jan to May 09 Tamil Civilians

7,400 22,200 1:3 Sri Lnkna Govt Census Report Jan 2013 (5)

Late 2008 to May 2009

Tamil Civilians

26,000 to 146,679

78,000 to 440,037

1:3

‘Still Counting the Dead’ F.Harrison, Oct. 2012 (3)

Late 2008-May 2009

Tamil Civilians

10,000 to 40,000

30,000 to 120,000

1:3 The Cage”. G, Weiss, May 2011 (4)

Jan to May 09 Tamil Civilians

7,400 22,200 1:3 Sri Lnkna Govt Census Report Jan 2013 (5)

Aug 2006 to May 09

Armed forces

6261 29551 1:4.6 Ministry of Defence(6)

Sources of information: (1) The UN’s Country Group in Sri Lanka established a total figure of 7,721 killed and 18,479 wounded.” International Crisis Group. (2) The United Nations Country Team is one source of information; in a document that was never released publicly, it estimated a total figure of 7,721 killed and 18,479 injured from August 2008 up to 13 May 2009, after which it became too difficult to count.” [paragraph 134, Darusman Report] (3) ..anywhere from 26,000 to 146,679 people unaccounted for, presumed dead.” p.238, Frances Harrison, Still Counting the Dead: Survivors of Sri Lanka’s Hidden War” (4) ..by late June, when all civilians were inside the [post-war IDP] camps, a collection of aid agencies had made

191

a preliminary calculation of 15,000-20,000 wounded civilians”. p. 321, The Cage”, Gordon Weiss

I believe that between 10,000 and 40,000 [deaths] is a reasonable estimate. I think most likely it’s somewhere between 30,000 to 40,000 [deaths] ”, Gordon Weiss on Australian TV & interviews (5) Sri Lanka Government’s post-war census report recorded that about 7,400 people died of undefined or other” causes during the months leading up to the end of the war.

- displaced population of the Vanni. In it he claimed the population of Mullaitivu District at present is about 81,000 families consisting of about 330,000 persons”. It became clear later that AGA Parthipan was not directly responsible for doing a headcount but prepared the estimates based on information provided by Grama Sevakas (Village officials) (GS) who were also in the NFZ. But as the UTHR(J) notes the reliability of the information by the GS was questionable because the GS’s in the Killinochchi and Mullaitivu districts worked very closely with the LTTE, in many instances directly assisting in enforcing the groups oppressive diktat. Also, even as the statistics were being compiled people were either escaping into Government controlled territory or being killed in the cross-fire. Ever since Kilinochchi fell on 1 January 2009 the LTTE was on the move and confined to an increasingly shrinking area around Puthukkudiyiruppu. Realising their plight the hostages were taking every opportunity to escape. In the space of 21 days (from February 6 – 27) – the period over which AGA Parthipan was collecting data – more than 29,000 people crossed over from LTTE-controlled territory in Mullaitivu into Government controlled territory[15]. There were other caveats too that UTHR(J) added to qualify the 330,000 population figure but everyone that followed using the figure ignored the warnings. At the end of February 2009, the UN country team informed the Sri Lankan Government that, in its view, there were 267,618 civilians present in the No-Fire-Zone_. It had based the estimate, in part, on UNOSAT Quickbird and Worldview satellite images, used to count the number of IDP shelters. The resolution of the imagery produced by both satellites was 0.6 and 0.5m respectively, meaning a pixel resolution of 60cm × 60cm or 50cm × 50 cm square. This resolution density is sufficient to be able to distinguish a single person on the ground. This figure combined with the 36,378 already in the IDP camps as at 25 February 3013 yields a total number of civilians of 303,996. To match Parthipan’s figure of 330,000 the UN calculation had to have an error of +23%, which is unlikely given the reliability of the imagery[16]. The Darusman Panel used data from medical centres and government hospitals within the NFZ in calculating the number of civilian deaths. Using deaths to injuries ratio of 1:2 or 1:3 it estimated the number of fatalities between 15,000-22,500. But it dismissed this somewhat more plausible number in favour of 40,000, claiming it had received credible allegations, which if proven, indicate that a wide range of serious violations of international humanitarian law and international human rights law had taken place”. They must be the calculations referred to in the table above.

Definition of civilian

192

Another major factor bearing on the integrity of the figure of civilians within the NFZ in February 2009 provided by Parthipan, was the blurring of the difference between combatant and civilian. UTHR(J) report quotes a large number of instances where combatants/conscripts/auxiliaries were routinely treated at civilian medical centres and their deaths included as part of civilian casualty data. In addition civilians killed by the LTTE were regularly passed off as fatalities due to shelling – allegedly always by the Sri Lankan Army_: Doctors working in the NFZ under those conditions did not dare defy the orders of the LTTE. The UTHR(J) summed up this general state of fear that gripped the State medical fraternity, and other civil servants not aligned to the LTTE cause. Sources close to him (Dr Shanmugarajah) told us that he had tried to escape from the Vanni and was apprehended by the LTTE, and beaten and taken back to the NFZ. The LTTE kept all the doctors under close watch. An armed guard was placed near them even when they did surgical operations”_

In these circumstances No doctor in an LTTE-controlled area dared to certify the LTTE as the cause of a death. Often they were spared this dilemma. When the wife of someone executed by the LTTE for political reasons went to the local headman in Jaffna, which was by then under Army control, to make an application for a death certificate, he, without batting an eyelid, wrote or altered the cause of death to Army shelling”_.

Misinterpreting satellite imagery

IDAG-Sri Lanka, which had the engineering expertise in satellite imagery, which the Panel lacked, identified major shortcomings in the analyses and misinterpretations of images by the Panel to draw partisan conclusions to support its predetermined position. Following a detailed study IDAG concluded that the Panel was keen to emphasize that the Sri Lankan Army was primarily firing artillery shells into the No-Fire-Zone, which it said was the reason for a large number of casualties. But the evidence gathered from analyzing high-resolution satellite imagery of the areas was far less supportive of this position. Its statement that the Army needlessly used heavy weapons in the last weeks since LTTE heavy weapons no longer posed a threat was flawed thinking, for the LTTE used them until May 17th from within the third NFZ. Compounding these serious deficiencies in analysis the Panel concluded that the Army’s artillery batteries were constantly adjusted to increasingly target the NFZs”. But this judgment shockingly ignored the underlying ground situation. Analyzing the images covering this period in parallel with images of the No-Fire-Zone depicting the locations of IDP shelters, IDAG showed that it was quite clear that from February 5 to March 29, the fire bearings of the artillery and mortar batteries were constantly changing in accord with the changes to the forward defence lines where front line soldiers needed fire support. A critical mistake made by the Panel was in assuming that these weapons were at all times consistently firing up to their maximum permissible range as projected in their illustrations – hence overlapping the No-Fire-Zone. It was amateurish to assume that artillery was firing constantly in one direction. There are always two parties involved and one reacts to the other. It was a major error to consider one side in isolation. In another event on May 9/10, which the UN had referred to as a blood bath”_ the Sri Lankan Army was alleged to have bombed the No-Fire-Zone with heavy artillery, rockets and mortar, leading to a large number of civilian casualties. Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International requested the Science and Human Rights Program of the American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS) to analyse and report for advocacy

193

purposes the conditions within the No-Fire-Zone. The conclusions the AAAS reached having studied the satellite imagery between May 6 and May 10 are striking: What caused the IDP structures to be removed between May 6 and May 10 is uncertain based solely on the imagery. It is notable how complete the removal of IDP structures appears, in that while some debris and evidence of the structures remains, overall the area appears to have been swept relatively clean. This is less indicative of the entire area being razed by shelling, though it could correspond with an emigration from those specific areas by the IDPs due to some outside driver[17]” The US may have been aware of these shortcomings of the Panel’s assessment for, as Ambassador Blake warned President Rajapaksa, their satellites were watching what was going on in the battle front. But it was convenient and advantageous to the political agenda not to raise inconvenient questions. There were several other glaring errors in how the Darusman Panel, which had no specialist expertise on satellite imagery, interpreted the images. (See IDAG-Sri Lanka for more information).

Completion of the Eastern Province campaign without any criticism

When the LTTE launched into the eelam War IV they were sure of victory against an ill prepared and little known opponent Mahinda Rajapaksa. But before long their military capacity in the Eastern Province had been reduced to nil. In this the breaking away of the Eastern Province Commander Vinayagamoorthy with 5000 cadres was a severe blow. By January 2008 they lost control of the north-western coastline. That was the loss of a lifeline for arms supplies from India. Outgunned and outnumbered, their troops were forced into a retreat that moved from west to east for the most part. They used landmines, bunds, trenches and booby traps to slow down the government forces. The capture of the Eastern Province by the Sri Lankan army went smoothly. There were no accusations of HR violations. Did the army turn monster after Eastern Province? The change occurred in fact with the LTTE. It increased its conscription of civilians to build defences and replenish troops. It was not very dangerous for them until January 2009 after which they were exposed to the crossfire. This was what the LTTE wanted. The civilians were, now not only a source of labour and conscripts; they were also hostages shielding the Tigers and providing a concern for humanitarian agencies, which intervened and sought a ceasefire from the warring parties. Since the LTTE had no intention of releasing the civilians or respecting any ceasefire, such interventions, as ADAG-S noted, were in fact a form of military aid for the LTTE. The humanitarian outcry raised by AI, HRW, ICG as well as some Western leaders was also a potential escape route that would have enabled the LTTE leadership to return to the fight another day. Pushing IDPs into the no-fire zones was a part of this strategy.

Wikileaks Cables

Wikileaks cables provide valuable unbiased information and mostly US government’s internal assessments on the situation in Sri Lanka since they are often meant for State Department eyes only. One such cable contains the views of ICRC on the role of the Sri Lankan armed forces:

194

On July 9, 2009 the then U.S. Ambassador-at-Large for War Crimes Issues – John Clint Williamson – whilst collecting information in relation to a U.S. Congressional reporting requirement, met with Jacques de Maio, the ICRC’s Head of Operations for South Asia who noted that the Sri Lankan military was somewhat responsive to accusations of violations of International Humanitarian Law (IHL) and was open to adapting its actions to reduce casualties [...] He could cite examples of where the Army had stopped shelling when ICRC informed them it was killing civilians. In fact, the Army actually could have won the military battle faster with higher civilian casualties, yet chose a slower approach which led to a greater number of Sri Lankan military deaths…” In the same cable, on the LTTE, de Maio said that it had tried to keep civilians in the middle of a permanent state of violence. It saw the civilian population as a protective asset” and kept its fighters embedded amongst them. De Maio said that the LTTE commanders’ objective was to keep the distinction between civilian and military assets blurred[18]…” In another Wikileaks Cable from Colombo, US Ambassador Robert Blake reports to Washington that he told the President on January 8, 2009 that according to General Sarath Fonseka the war could end within two months. But Blake says President Rajapaksa told him that it could take several months more because he was intent on avoiding large-scale civilian casualties”. If not the war would have ended in February 2009. But that information was completely forgotten as evident in the US actions that followed with the accusations of mass killings brought in UNHRC. All these show the allegations against Sri Lanka were politically motivated.

Other relevant factors

A major accusation against Sri Lanka is that heavy artillery was permanently directed to the no-fire zones with the aim of killing large numbers of civilians in a genocide strategy. The direction of fire issue has been dealt with elsewhere in this submission. But with regard to accusations of genocide it reflects the level of ignorance of the critics, of the situation in Sri Lanka. There are several important reasons for this: It is a little acknowledged fact that only 43 per cent of Sri Lanka’s Tamil population reside in the north. All the rest live among the Sinhalese in the south as they have done for generations. If the government was keen on genocide it had a target much closer. This type of nonsensical argument stems not from ignorance but from their determination to pin the country by fair or foul means. There was even greater opportunity to incarcerate a generation of young Tamils for years under the law of the land when 12,000 of the LTTE cadres who fought the armed forces were detained at the end of hostilities. But the President ordered the army to treat them as your own children”. As a result, except for some 400 who had committed major criminal offences, all the rest were rehabilitated, trained in a trade to help them earn a living, given bank loans on the basis of government guarantee and released back to the community. That was not all. Since the end of the war there has been massive investment in the north building houses and infra structure such as roads, schools, hospitals and other facilities to modernise the region that had been badly neglected under 30 years of LTTE rule. Growth rate in the five years since the end of the war was estimated at 22 per cent, which shows the massive scale of investment in the region.

195

Are these the signs of a government bent on genocide of Tamils?

Accusations politically motivated

Western political leaders rely on the LTTE for two favours. One is funds and the other votes. These have been driving at least the Democratic Party leaders in the US and both parties in the British parliament. Evidently French too are involved in a similar way. According to the US Federal Election Commission (FEC.GOV), Obama (as well as the head of the US Congress Sri Lanka Caucus – Representative Rush Holt) had accepted donations from, as well as funds raised by, the same American LTTE fundraiser, Mr. Ram Ranjan, who was fired by Hillary. Ranjan was formerly regional director of the banned TRO, according to the Seattle Times”[19]. Other support given by Tamils for Obama and their expectations in return, are documented in a letter written to the President after reelection:

During the campaign season we raised funds for your campaign through our website.‘ We polled opinion among Tamil Americans (95% preferred you), and distributed this result in the battleground states (all the major networks reported this poll and its result on their websites). ‘Our Tamil American friends, working with your campaign, worked at phone banks in the days leading up to the election.’ We made and distributed two not-so-obviously-partisan videos”.

Then the payback: We hope to see an independent Tamil homeland–Tamil Eelam–merge in northeastern Sri Lanka. We hope that you and your next secretary of state will have an active part in helping Tamil Eelam to be born”[20]. Meanwhile in the UK the campaign by former foreign secretary David Miliband to champion aid and human rights during the Sri Lankan humanitarian crisis was largely driven by domestic political calculations, according to a Foreign Office official. A leaked May 2009 cable from the US embassy in London quotes the official, Tim Waite, a Foreign Office team leader on Sri Lanka, explaining Miliband’s intense focus on the plight of the country’s Tamils in terms of UK electoral geography. “Waite said that much of [Her Majesty's government] and ministerial attention to Sri Lanka is due to the ‘very vocal’ Tamil diaspora in the UK, numbering over 300,000, who have been protesting in front of parliament since 6 April,” Richard Mills, a political officer at the US embassy, reported. “He said that with UK elections on the horizon and many Tamils living in Labour constituencies with slim majorities, the government is paying particular attention to Sri Lanka, with Miliband recently remarking to Waite that he was spending 60% of his time at the moment on Sri Lanka.” To use the United Nations to push their political agenda Miliband and Kouchner would be hosting a meeting on the issue on the sidelines of an international meeting in New York within a week, while Miliband would be raising the subject with American officials in Washington on the same trip[21]”.

196

Tamil Diaspora continues to fight for a separate state

The war has ended five years ago but the diaspora continues to entertain dreams of a separate state in Sri Lanka. As the International Crisis Group saysFunding networks established by the LTTE over decades are seriously weakened but still in place. There is little chance, however, of the Tigers regrouping in the diaspora. …Nonetheless, most Tamils abroad remain profoundly committed to Tamil Eelam, the existence of a separate state in Sri Lanka. This has widened the gap between the diaspora and Tamils in Sri Lanka. Most (Tamils) in the country are exhausted by decades of war and are more concerned with rebuilding their lives under difficult circumstances than in continuing the struggle for an independent state. There is no popular support for a return to armed struggle. ….So long as this is the case, most Western governments will remain sceptical of the diaspora’s post-LTTE political initiatives.[22]. What the international community can do is to stop stoking diaspora aspirations to destabilize Sri Lanka since the main victims will be, as before, the Tamils living in the country whose life will be disrupted just when they are emerging from 30 years of pain and suffering. CONCLUSION Under the UNHRC resolution Sri Lanka is accused of major human rights and humanitarian law violations. These are mainly based on the report of the Secretary General’s Panel of Experts and accusations by some western governments and NGOs. Also it is clear a large volume of fake claims will be lodged this time round too. Police have last week arrested a man in the north with six signed ‘UN war crimes complaints forms’. But since the Darusman report was released Sri Lankan Presidential Commission- LLRC, as well as a number of well-researched independent reports have strongly disputed the Panel’s conclusions. But the two sets of arguments run on parallel tracks. Unless they come together a mutually acceptable position can never be reached. It is clear the allegations are largely politically motivated with the Tamil diaspora continuing to pressure western governments to help establish a separate state in the north of Sri Lanka. For this the diaspora uses its political clout especially in the UK, France and the US, all key players in the Unite Nations. The irony of this is that richer and more powerful countries that have committed more atrocious human rights violations are never taken to task while helpless poor nations are pursued relentlessly. This double standard has created the strong impression among the poorer countries that the UN is not for them. Consequently there is a groundswell of support for an alternative option. Sadly, such a move will defeat the founding aims of the United Nations. Sri Lanka has accomplished a lot in bringing about reconciliation in the five years since the war. This is a marvelous accomplishment for a developing country devastated by war. But in its haste to persecute Sri Lanka the UNHRC has never acknowledged this achievement. If taken, such measures will encourage the country to do even more and cease nurturing resentment against the organization of which it is also an equal partner. Also this preoccupation consumes resources of the world body that could be more fruitfully allocated for more pressing current issues in the international arena.

197

The Panel of Experts, we hope, will look at the evidence on both sides objectively and help achieve a fair outcome, instead of endorsing the actions of the Commissioner as all previous consultants did, and restore confidence of developing nations in the UN system. RECOMMENDATIONS We recommend that the Panel of Experts:

11 Recommend that UNHRC work with authors of studies critical of the Darusman report and other similar material to establish their veracity and take on board their views.

12 Recommend that the UNHRC move away from the current prosecuting mode and work towards bringing together a working party of the two sides to achieve a compromise solution.

13 Recommend action to insulate the UNHRC from being hijacked for political or other unintended purposes so that it will not go the same way as its discredited predecessor Human Rights Commission.

14 Reconsider whether the role of the High Commissioner for Human Rights needs to be changed from prosecutor to an impartial official, and leave prosecution to a more specialized body. That will help to maintain the Council as a consensus building body promoting human rights in keeping with UN traditions: and

15 Urge a review of the Humanitarian law and human rights law with a view to specifically addressing internal conflicts and how to bring in non-

state parties to account for their actions UN FAILED TO PROTECT CIVILIANS FROM LTTE - NEW REPORT Annex ‘AQ’ The United Nations failed in its mandate to protect Sri Lankan civilians caught up in the final phases of the Indian Ocean island’s bloody war, a new report has said.

Sri Lanka’s civil conflict ended in May 2009 in cataclysmic final battle in which government forces surrounded Tamil rebels on a tiny strip of coastal land, where the separatists kept hundreds of thousands of civilians as human shields.

A 2011 U.N. probe estimates about 40,000 people were killed in the final phases of the war, mostly by army shelling and bombardments. Sri Lanka has rejected the allegation and claims in its own investigation that around 7,000 people died.

198

Written by two Sri Lankan charities, the report said despite signs of escalating violence, U.N. staff “consistently preferred to err on the side of caution in responding to the crisis.”

“The UN system as a whole made little effort to prevent the humanitarian tragedy that ensued,” said the Narratives III report.

“They failed to diagnose the nature of the problem at the early stages and were incapable of designing a coordinated strategy to separate the civilians from the LTTE (rebels) and enable them to move into the government controlled areas.”

The report - by the Marga Institute and the Consortium of Humanitarian Agencies - contradicts earlier reports by the U.N. and human rights groups which puts the blame for civilian deaths largely on government forces.

Instead, it holds the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE) primarily responsible due to its strategy of holding civilians captive and using them as shields.

It said it was necessary to question whether the U.N.’s surveillance of the actions of the LTTE was adequate and whether more decisive action could have been taken to prevent civilians being used in this manner.

The U.N. office in Colombo declined to comment on the report’s findings.

U.N. LACKED RESPONSIBILITY

The report questions various actions taken by the U.N. such the almost immediate relocation of all its staff out of the war zone, saying that even though the government advised the U.N. to leave due to safety risks, the organisation should have negotiated to stay.

“In the context of both the lack of contestation of the government’s request and the absence of any negotiation for further time to be provided, the report concludes that the U.N. failed in its protection mandate by relocating,” it states.

The report said the U.N. lacked a strategic approach to minimising the death toll. It said the U.N. should have encouraged civilians who were fleeing with the rebels to cross over to government controlled area, adding that this would have avoided people being used as human shields.

It attributed some of the failures to staff on the ground which it said had little or no expertise in analysing military operations in terms of their humanitarian risks or in protecting civilians.

The report also said the U.N.’s complex bureaucracy and decision-making processes prevented vital information from being channelled to senior officials with expertise.

For example, during a 10-month window of opportunity for the U.N. to roll out a comprehensive plan for civilian evacuation, no information on the potential risks that civilians would eventually face was transmitted to U.N. headquarters, it said.

“The U.N. bureaucracy and parochial decision-making processes at the time prevented such a plan - a plan that could have significantly reduced the

199

number of civilian casualties during the latter states of the war,” it said.

The U.N. human rights office in July embarked on a controversial probe into alleged war crimes. The move has angered President Mahinda Rajapaksa’s government which says it will not cooperate with U.N. investigators, Reuters reports.

QUESTIONS RAISED ON THE TRANSPARENCY AND INTEGRITY OF THE OISL Annex ‘AR’ Serious concerns regarding the credibility of the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) investigation on Sri Lanka (OISL) being carried out has arisen, due to the recent discovery of signatures being obtained in blank forms, from the families of those affected by the conflict. The minister of foreign affairs Professor G.L. Peiris convened a meeting last week with representatives of the OISL and Heads of Missions, and briefed them on the recent arrest of Sinnathamby Krishnarasa who had possessed blank forms containing signatures of conflict affected persons who had been promised monetary compensations by the UN in exchange for their signatures and copies of National Identity Cards and death certificates. The minister during the meeting pointed out that investigations following his arrest have revealed that the information collected by deceiving conflict affected families was to be utilised in reports to the OISL. Peiris raised concerns over the integrity and transparency of the whole OISL process and also highlighted the fact that certain parties were trying to manipulate the plight of these innocent people in order to distort the truth and create a distorted picture in order to discredit the Sri Lankan Government and the security forces. Krishnarasa who resides in Kiranchi Pooneryn had undergone training in the LTTE in 1999 in Kiranchi under the political wing member Nation and thereafter engaged in activities of the LTTE. During the conflict his daughter Lingeswarie was killed in battle while another daughter Sudharshini is reported missing in action. During the conflict Krishnarasa lived in Vishwamadu and with the end of the conflict had moved to the government controlled area in Mullivaikkal. Thereafter he lived in Manik farm until his resettlement in the present location in November 2009. On October 25, Krishnarasa who was an ex-LTTE non rehabilitated cadre was taken in for questioning for having in his possession 25 blank submission papers of which six had signatures on them. The six signatures that were on the forms were of persons from Kumalamunai, Mulangavil and Iranamathanagar. These forms were to be subsequently submitted to the OISL Geneva and it is suspected that the blank signatures were obtained with the intention of a third party filling them out later implicating the security forces of human rights violations. Sources from within the TNA revealed that the forms were to be subsequently filled as per the instructions of the TNA blaming the security forces of HR violations. The suspect also had in his possession a diary containing around 400 names of those who had lost their loved ones in the war and according to certain TNA members who wished to remain anonymous, they were instructed to obtain the signatures of all those on the list obtained from the local authorities. This list of 400 contained names of missing persons, the names of persons who had died and injured during the humanitarian operations in Puthulathalan, Kiranchi, Mulliyavaikkal, Iranamadu, Nachchikuda, Mulankavil, Sugandhirapuram and Valaignanamadam. The list had also contained names of children who the parents had not allowed the LTTE to conscript.

200

Upon speaking to several persons who had signed this form, it was revealed that they were told this form was to obtain compensation from the UN for their losses and also requested tem to hand over any other relevant documentation as well including death certificates etc. These vulnerable people had believed this story as they could not read the forms. Hence the information had been collected on the pretext that the TNA is planning to help provide financial and material aid to families who had been affected by the humanitarian operations. Further while searching his home police had also discovered detailed information on all military camps in the Vanni area detailing even the troop strength in every camp. It was further revealed that Krishnarasa had been instructed to meet Alva Pulle Vijendrakumar alias Sun Master (presently serving on the TNA advisory panel) at the Vavuniya bus stand at 1500 hrs on the 22nd of October. At this meeting Sun master had handed over the submission papers and instructed Krishnarasa to collect death certificates of any person who had been killed during the humanitarian operations, personal details of war widows and their national identity card numbers and photographs of disabled persons. Further sun master had instructed him to gather only the signatures of individuals on the forms that he had provided. The Sunday Leader also reliably learns that even during investigations conducted by the law enforcement authorities, Sun Master had been contacting Krishnarasa on his mobile phone. Further it was also revealed that several other trusted TNA supporters including a grama sevaka had also been engaged in gathering such information and signatures. It is also alleged that the Tamil National People’s Front (TNPF) and TNA Northern Provincial Council member Ananthy Sasitharan had also been involved in this sinister endeavor. In fact she had requested the office of the UN high commissioner for human rights in Geneva to grant them more time to gather information. The Sunday Leader also reliably learns that Ananthi and T.Ravikaran (another NPC member) went to Geneva on their own without NPC permission. According to TNA sources, the Governor took the issue very seriously and sent a letter to NPC Chairman C V K Sivagnanam saying that henceforth, NPC members will have to take the Governor’s permission for overseas visits, even if private. Chairman of NPC, C V K Sivagnanam says that the circular on foreign travel had been issued to all Provincial Councils four or five years ago but it was brought to the notice of the NPC (by the Governor) only recently after the controversial visit of Ananthi and Ravikaran to Geneva in the second half of September this year. Meanwhile issuing a statement the minister of External Affairs Professor G.L. Peiris had pointed to the unofficial extension of the deadline given to make submissions to the OISL that was conveyed by the OHCHR Spokesman to a local newspaper, in which he had stated that late submissions would not necessarily be refused since some material would take time to arrive.

201

But Prof. Peiris stated that although it is not unusual to extend the deadline, the manner in which it has been done and the fact that it came soon after Northern provincial council member Ananthi Saitharan requested for such an extension, has benefitted groups with vested interests. The Minister had also stated that such actions are unacceptable and had expressed his shock at the unprofessional conduct demonstrated through such developments. He had also expressed regret at the nature in which the hearings of the OISL are to be carried out in Europe, Asia Pacific and North America where alleged victims residing out of Sri Lanka are due to be accessed. He had pointed out that the absence of the dates or venues of such hearings shows that the OISL arranges only to interact with persons of their choosing who would give them access to the type of information they wish to receive for a specific outcome. It is also noteworthy that arrested LTTE members in Malaysia were found to be in possession of UNHCR identity cards, raising concerns regarding the involvement and the motives of the organisation itself. It also raises concerns regarding the UN’s refusal to reveal the identities of those who provided information to the Darusman panel until 2013. In the wake of discovering the blank forms being distributed, it raises doubt if the information provided for the Darusman panel were also obtained in the same manner. Meanwhile Professor Peiris further stated that the processes of the OISL so far demonstrates a selected and biased approach and had stated that despite Sri Lanka rejecting the investigation it is only reasonable to expect that certain fundamental principles relating to the objectivity and fairness is followed. Further the UNHCR had granted approval for submissions to be made in all three languages, however they had later informed those who made submissions that all supporting documents have to be translated into English, French, Spanish or Russian language. The OHCHR in an earlier circular calling for submissions stated that Individuals, organisations and governments are invited to submit information and/or documentation on alleged serious violations and abuses of human rights and related crimes allegedly perpetrated from 21 February 2002 until 15 November 2011 in Sri Lanka by either of the parties to the armed conflict. It said that submissions must be made by midnight, Geneva time, on 30 October 2014. This is to allow the investigation team time to analyse all the information gathered before drafting its report. Drafting needs to be completed at least two months before the report is presented to the HRC in March. Yet in spite of the guidelines clearly mentioned the spokesman for the OHCHR extends the cut off date. This too raises concerns whether Anandi Sasitharan’s visit had anything to do with this extension, and if so how credible will this investigation be? Taking all these incidents into account it is clear that this investigation does not stand in consistence with the practice of the United Nations fact finding bodies and does not conform to establish reasonable grounds to believe and be accepted as a standard of proof.

202

Meanwhile The United States has expressed concern over the Sri Lankan government’s attempt to silence persons cooperating with the United Nations mechanism inquiring into Sri Lanka. US Ambassador to the UNHRC Keith Harper had tweeted on his official twitter account that Sri Lanka must understand that attempting to silence those cooperating with the UN is an attack on the UN. Further the TNA too had denied any involvement with the distribution of the blank forms and also denied that Sun Master is a member of the TNA and that alleged activities with regard to the distribution and collection of forms have not been endorsed by the TNA. SRI LANKA INVESTIGATION: OHCHR MUST ADMIT OR DENY IT PRINTED SUBMISSION FORMS AND IF MONETARY COMPENSATION WAS PAID FOR TESTIMONIES: UNHRC and its head have been thrown off balance. OISL investigation is being questioned and rightly so when a LTTE is arrested with blank UNHRC war crimes submission forms with signatures. Pre-emptive strategies are taking place to shift the focus from what should remain 2 questions integral to the integrity and credibility of an international investigation on Sri Lanka. UNHRC head needs to only answer if UNHRC war crimes submission forms were printed in Geneva and delivered to the TNA and if monetary compensation was promised in exchange for testimonies. The GOSL and Sri Lankan Media must not rest until the UN/UNHRC answers these two crucial questions. UNHRC head can make any accusations against Sri Lanka after answering these two extremely important questions. The un-rehabilitated LTTE cadre was arrested on 25th October 2014. He had in his possession signatures on blank UNHRC war crimes submission forms. He was collecting these on the instructions of a Tamil National Alliance political advisor (Sun Master alias Alva Pulle Vijendrakumar) now fled to India and associated with US embassy political affairs officer Mike Erwin. What is the UNHRC/LTTE/TNA and foreign envoys upto? The GOSL should not get side-tracked into responding to accusations thrown by the OHCHR to purposely distract Sri Lanka from keeping focused to what remains a major flaw and fallacy in the process of investigating Sri Lanka and the assurance of transparency and unbiased due process. With the arrest of the LTTE cadre who had been over a period of time collecting signatures, NICs, death certificates, photographs of disabled persons and diary entries of Tamils dead and injured during the final stages of the conflict, the Sri Lankan public have every right to know exactly how many such forms have been distributed and who has been filling these forms and what type of compensation has been thus far paid and by whom for testimonies. The anxiety of the public necessitates that the GOSL voice these concerns at all official levels and inform the UN General Assembly of foul play taking place if Sri Lanka is led to that level. Instead of being alarmed that blank submission forms with OHCHR logo is being distributed with entities collecting signatures that once filled by third parties is likely to create an imbalance and contribute to false testimonies and effect the impartial outcome of the report, the OHCHR Head has embarked on a tirade against Sri Lanka. The statement issued by the new head of the UNHRC Zeid Ra’ad Al Hussein issued on 7th November

203

• Criticized and condemned the Sri Lankan Government for the continuing campaign of distortion and disinformation about the

investigation and insidious attempts to prevent possible bonafide witnesses from submitting information to the investigation team

Who is contributing to distortion and disinformation?

• The Sri Lankan Government did not print blank OHCHR submission forms. For highlighting the fact that blank forms are floating around with signatures and third parties are filling them and sending to OHCHR investigation team is it correct to accuse Sri Lanka of ‘continuing campaign of distortion and disinformation’?

• The Sri Lankan Government did not promise monetary compensation in exchange for testimonies – how can there be ‘bonafide

witnesses’ when we do not know how many signed on blank forms and what third parties are writing and submitting as victim accounts? Sri Lanka has every right to ask exactly how many such forms did the OHCHR actually print and distribute and who are the parties outsources to fill these blank forms?

• The Sri Lankan Government did not task LTTE to collect blank signatures on UNHRC forms, collect national ID cards and death

certificates or photos of injured • The Sri Lankan Government is NOT compromising the integrity of the investigation. • How can Sri Lanka be sabotaging an ‘impartial’ international investigation when the arrest of the LTTE cadre has revealed he was instructed

by TNA advisory panel member to collect signatures on blank forms and the assurance that UN would compensate for witness testimonies. Who now is sabotaging the ‘impartial’ investigation? The only wrong that the Sri Lankan Government has done is to arrest the LTTE opening a can of worms and a pandora’s box from which dirty secrets and lies have emerged which OHCHR, US Embassy and a host of others obviously have no answers for and the easy response is to carry out a smear campaign against Sri Lanka.

• How can Sri Lanka be intimidating individuals from submitting evidence to the UN when the Sri Lankan Government does not know what is

being written on the blank forms which have only signatures? • If the OHCHR feels that the conduct of Sri Lanka in arresting and exposing an LTTE cadre with blank UNHRC logo war crimes submission

forms is unacceptable conduct by a UN Member state and is against the UN Charter, the Sri Lankan Government should be more than willing to place before the UN General Assembly members all the facts related to the arrest and demand that the OHCHR reply whether it printed the forms and if it promised monetary compensation for witness testimonies.

• OHCHR Head instead of issuing statements without evidence may also like to say with examples how has Sri Lanka since 2009 continued to

‘obstruct any independent investigation despite the persistent compelling and widespread allegations that possible serious international

204

crimes were committed’ – there is only the Panel of Expert report and some edited Channel 4 footage. Both questionable on legality and transparency.

• OHCHR Head is also plugging into his statement that civil society organizations, human rights defenders have been subject to harassment and intimidation – what does all this have to do with the arrest of the LTTEr with blank UNHRC war crimes submission forms and the genuine concern of how many forms are out there and who are filling lies and what compensation is being paid for lies too?

• On what grounds can the OHCHR head reject the accusations by Sri Lanka as ‘false and unsubstantiated’ because he can only do so

AFTER he has

ADMITTED or DENIED that OHCHR forms were printed – how many filled forms have reached the OISL investigation team and what percentage is that of the total submissions received now that the deadline is officially over (though it appears that there is an unofficial open submission timeline again for selected submissions and the UNHRC head calls Sri Lanka’s conduct ‘unprofessional’! ADMITTED or DENIED how many such forms OHCHR printed and whether photocopy of forms could be accepted (if there was no serial number on each form) ADMITTED or DENIED that monetary compensation was to be paid in exchange of witness testimonies in which case he should also say how much was promised to each and how many have been paid thus far

• On what grounds can the UNHRC head reject as ‘absurd’ the arrest of the LTTE with UNHRC blank forms because NO ONE WILL KNOW except the UNHRC head and the investigation team how many of these fraudulently filled forms in exchange for money will be used to compile the report against Sri Lanka. Excuse us but UNHRC, its Head and OISL have some serious explaining to do and simply reprimanding Sri Lanka is simply evading the issue and trying distract the focus.

• UNHRC head does not accept anything at ‘face value’ – super news. Can we then be told how can UNHRC investigators who are trained to spot fraudulent submissions know when someone signs a blank form for money and someone else fills it up? It would be interesting to know if the UNHRC adopted this blank form tactic in the other 40 Commissions of Inquiry, Fact Finding Missions held thus far. Some research into blank forms floating around in these countries would leave UNHRC head speechless no doubt but bouncing back with some accusation against countries exposing the frauds taking place!

• The UNHRC head also says it’s a ‘false equation to suggest that because someone may have been trying to submit false submissions, the inquiry is discredited’. By what logic can he say this because he and his office has thus far not revealed whether they have printed such forms, whether they promised and did pay compensation for testimonies or how many such fraudulent forms are going to be given ‘witness protection’ status and anonymity for 20 years! There is no question of ‘someone may have been trying to submit’ – we need to know how many forms were fraudulently submitted and the UNHRC does not seem to want to answer this question. Why is that?

205

• Let’s get to the point again. We know there are blank forms, we don’t know how many, but we do need to know if they were printed by

the OHCHR office/UNHRC in Geneva, its office in Colombo or by any of its associates.

• OHCHR and its head need to stop beating about the bush and simply answer whether they printed the forms or not (directly by them or indirectly through a third party) as well as the other key component of money in exchange for witness testimonies which is a grave illegality.

• The UNHRC head has been very sharp to say that the UN had not formatted or distributed forms …. What we asked was not whether the UN had formatted forms but whether the OHCHR/UNHRC printed forms. We also did not accuse the UN of providing monetary compensation in exchange for information – we expect the OHCHR to answer not that UN did not print forms or pay compensation for information but if OHCHR printed forms and paid for compensation…very clever way to respond!

• The OISL investigation can follow whatever international standards it maintains to keep but we are more concerned about the issue of transparency and whether interviews are released or not what is important is that there is an initiative in place to get signatures on blank forms and the GOSL has every right to ask and be given an valid and acceptable response from the OHCHR head and organization that it did not have a role in it and if so what reveal how many such forms have been sent to and accepted by the OISL team. Until OHCHR head and office answers what are very basic questions it is the OHCHR head and office who are ‘obscuring’ the investigation.

• Does the OHCHR head prefer that Sri Lanka does not question the OHCHR about the blank forms, the signatures, the fraudulent submission entries and simply watch and wait till the March 2015 report is released when these submissions become the basis on which Sri Lanka is found guilty and recommended for division?

As far as Sri Lanka is concerned it should not be taken off track or diverted into responding to any of the accusations being made by the OHCHR or its head. Sri Lankan Government must just stick to demanding answers to just 2 key questions UNHRC/OHCHR BLANK FORMS

10 Did or Did the OHCHR/UNHRC office (Not the UN) print and distribute blank war crimes submission forms 11 Did or Did the OHCHR/UNHRC office (Not the UN) assure and give monetary compensation for information/witness testimonies

The answer to these 2 questions will reveal how far the OISL investigation on Sri Lanka is credible or not. THE SIGNATURES ARE GENUINE BUT THE WITNESS ACCOUNT IS FALSE: The signatures are genuine but the witness account is false – how does the OHCHR/UNHRC and OISL define this? Is it a forgery or false evidence or how else would OHCHR define such mischief? It certainly is not a bonafide witness account. The OISL or the OHCHR have not to date revealed even

206

before the arrest how many such forms they have received despite having experts to detect forgeries and when it was discovered after the arrest that there is a concerted effort in Sri Lanka and probably overseas as well to collect genuine signatures but write false accounts no one but the OHCHR and the UNSG have got upset at the disclosure. Is this not strange? The UNHRC/OHCHR/ OISL or the UN Secretary General has not satisfactorily responded to the arrest and in particular the findings. The submission format can vary too – the LTTE Diaspora may have compiled their own submission format. The crux of the matter is that there are groups of people collecting signatures of people with no date and photos, NIC copies and death certificates as well. When a form is blank and the collectors are LTTE, surely we are not childish to think that whoever is making entries will be showering praise or singing hosannas’ for the Sri Lankan soldiers! Thus, Sri Lanka and the general public have every right to be concerned. That concern is elevated because of several other factors.

• On 22nd October 2014, the LTTE unrehabilitated cadre had handed blank forms with signatures to a TNA advisory panel member known as Sun Master. This naturally raises more questions as to how many such forms the LTTE cadre would have handed over. Sun Master however has fled to India.

• There are serious doubts as to how many other LTTE cadres would have been given a similar task and how many such blank forms

have been thus collected since the announcement of the investigation.

• There is also the doubt of the same exercise being carried in countries where Tamil diaspora prevail. We are aware that the GOSL proscribed organizations have launched online appeals via their websites and have set up ‘investigation’ teams to tabulate ‘grievances’. This all leads to the question of who and how many are involved in doctoring information and building up false accounts via ghost writers!

The global scale of this initiative is nothing we should take lightly particularly so when the UNHRC boasts of having wonderful systems in place to assure transparency. Yet, our surprise and disappointment comes in the manner that both the UNHRC head and UNSG has behaved after the GOSL questioned the credibility of the investigation after the arrest. Let us also point out that the UNHRC is on record for saying that they have means to detect forgery, if so why has the OISL/OHCHR or the UNHRC not brought up the fact that they have been receiving forged submissions because the arrest of the LTTE with blank forms on 25th Oct 2014 within days of the deadline and the fact that on 22nd Oct 2014 he had handed more blank forms to the TNA member means that this effort must have been taking place for some time and filled forms would have already been sent via soft copy or post to the OISL in Geneva. That the OHCHR/OISL and the UNHRC have kept mum about receiving ‘doctored’ forms (given that they have systems to discover such)

207

gives Sri Lanka every right to question complicity on the part of the investigators or raise doubt as to the credibility of their in-house systems to discover forgeries. Of course the quick defence of the OHCHR/UNHRC and OISL would be is to declare that they do not need to disclose how many they have rejected but such secrecy and lack of transparency gives us every right to think that the OHCHR/UNHRC and OISL may not have rejected these forged forms! The important factor that needs to be continuously stressed by Sri Lanka is that there has been a concerted and systematic effort to collect from Tamils their signatures on blank forms with no date alongside NIC and death certificate copies and photos. The promise of monetary compensation would need to be further investigated because a promise is one thing and an actual payment is another. It would be good to investigate how many have actually been paid and who paid them too.

• The Sri Lankan envoys need to show the manner in which the OHCHR/UNHRC has treated Sri Lanka following the arrest of the LTTE cadre. That arrest and the revelation and exposure of a well-planned out effort to fix the Sri Lankan soldiers with fraudulent accusations cannot result in the OHCHR head accusing Sri Lanka of ‘continuing a campaign distortion and disinformation’ going on to say that Sri Lanka has been making ‘insidious attempts to prevent possible bonafide witnesses from submitting information to the investigation team’.

• OHCHR head must realize that blank forms and signatures with no date means that there are no bonafide witnesses and the

only ‘witnesses’ submitting information to the OISL investigators are some ghost writers putting together falsehoods to corner Sri Lankan troops to war crimes charges. It is appalling to see the lengths people are going to since they have nothing concrete to hold against Sri Lankan troops.

• The Sri Lankan envoys should also query about the OHCHR heads statement that says that they have mechanisms to detect forgeries – if so why has the OHCHR not released that they were in regular receipt of such forms without waiting for the arrest of the LTTE cadre which brought this plot out into the open?

• Had it not been for the arrest Sri Lankan troops would have been charged with war crimes and the OHCHR would have kept

mum about receipt of forged submission forms – This is what needs to be continuously brought out among member countries of the UN

OHCHR Head says We don’t accept anything at face value. UN human rights investigators are trained to spot fraudulent submissions. The process of analysis and corroboration of information and evidence is well defined, refined and codified on the basis of many years’ experience,” The question is CAN THESE EXPERTS SPOT SUBMISSIONS THAT HAVE GENUINE SIGNATURES BUT FORGED ACCOUNTS? OHCHR Head also says It is a false equation to suggest that because someone may have been trying to submit false submissions, the inquiry is discredited. In addition, the submissions form only a part of the investigation.” – The question is if we do not know (only the OISL know but do not say so) how many submissions of the type the LTTE cadre was collecting have actually been submitted to the OISL who have accepted them as ‘genuine’ bondafide witness accounts, the Sri Lankan state has every

208

right to question the OISL investigation on Sri Lanka and declare it has NO CREDIBILITY whatsoever. What we are continuously reiterating is that not only is there a plan by various pro-LTTE entities to collect signatures on blank forms and fill details that would fit into a plan to fix Sri Lankan troops and send as submissions to the OISL investigation, that these have been accepted by the OISL, though we do not know how many. Additionally, the OHCHR inspite of having mechanisms to detect forgeries have kept mum because they have not disclosed that they were in receipt of forms that had genuine signatures but forged accounts. The arrest has exposed that silence so now the OHCHR have now got upset that they have been put into a very embarrassing situation. However this does not warrant the OHCHR, its head and the UNSG to rashly accuse Sri Lanka with unwarranted accusations because they have been exposed. Thus, the OHCHR and the UNSG must offer an apology to Sri Lanka for accusing Sri Lanka of ‘continuing a campaign distortion and disinformation’ going on to say that Sri Lanka has been making ‘insidious attempts to prevent possible bonafide witnesses from submitting information to the investigation team’. Now that Israel has rejected the UNHRC investigation and called it a ‘kangaroo court’ we are waiting to see OHCHR Head or UNSG’s statement accusing Israel in the same manner they have insulted Sri Lanka. UN Member nations need to be appraised of these developments and these arguments via diplomatic channels since the OHCHR has not come clean on forged submissions being sent to them PRIOR to the arrest when it has emerged that forged submissions are being sent as supposed bonafide witness accounts. INVESTIGATION ON SRI LANKA – A VIOLATION OF THE TIME FRAME GIVEN UNDER UNCHR RESOLUTION Annex ‘AS’ As can be seen from the flowing facts, the ‘time frame’ covered under the UNCHR Resolution A/HRC/25/L.1/Rev.1 has been extended by the Navi Pillay’s controversial Panel by misinterpreting the time frame covered in the LLRC. Under the terms and reference of the OHCHR Investigation on Sri Lanka published in the web page http://www.ohchr.org/EN/HRBodies/HRC/Pages/OISL.aspx, , the ‘time frame’ of investigation is defined as the period under investigation is that covered by the LLRC, that is, from 21 February 2002 until 15 November 2011, when it presented its report to the President of Sri Lanka”. Time Frame covered in UNCHR Resolution A/HRC/25/L.1/Rev.1 Section 10 (b) of the UN HRC resolution A/HRC/25/L.1/Rev.1 dated 26 March 2014 states as follows.

209

To undertake a comprehensive investigation into alleged serious violations and abuses of human rights and related crimes by both parties in Sri Lanka during the period covered by the Lessons Learnt and Reconciliation Commission, and to establish the facts and circumstances of such alleged violations and of the crimes perpetrated with a view to avoiding impunity and ensuring accountability, with assistance from relevant experts and special procedures mandate holders;” Time Frame covered in the Lessons Learnt and Reconciliation Commission (LLRC) As per thehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lessons_Learnt_and_Reconciliation_Commissionthe ‘time frame’ given in the LLRC is as follows. “To inquire and report on the following matters that may have taken place during the period between 21st February, 2002 and 19th May, 2009, namely:.. ” Thus the above extension of time is s a blunt violation of the time frame given by the Human Rights Council Resolution A/HRC/25/1. This is a clear indication of the direction as to what we will get at the end of its so-called investigations. As per the previous UN reports and the way things are happening, such as the infamous Darusman Report, it is justifiable to believe that the ‘final’ report has already been cooked up & ready for presentation at the appointed time. UN EXTENDED DEADLINE TO OBTAIN FABRICATED EVIDENCE Annex ‘AT’ External Affairs Minister G.L. Peiris yesterday chided UN Human Rights Chief Prince Zeid for adopting double standards and extending the deadline for submissions of evidence by the UN investigation an attempt to open the door to fabricated evidence. Addressing a media briefing in Colombo yesterday, Minister Peiris said the UN probe team had been aware of the gathering of falsified evidence in Sri Lanka. “They needed to open a door for this fabricated evidence,” the Minister charged. “These are not the signs of a clean and transparent investigation.” The UN had told a group of known persons that they were willing to accept evidence from them despite the expired deadline, despite telling the world that the closing date for submissions was 31 October 2014, the Minister accused. The Minister said he had already briefed UN Resident Coordinator in Sri Lanka Subanay Nandy about the situation and would be briefing several diplomats today.

210

“The conspiracy against our country continues. The war has not ended. The method has changed that is all. Today it is not fought with guns and artillery. It is with foreign relations, the power of the foreign media and money that is being used to wage this war against Sri Lanka,” he charged. A Government that defeated brutal terrorists would not find it hard to defeat these conspiracies he added. The Minister said that the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights Prince Zeid Ra’ad Al Hussein was putting pressure on Sri Lanka to make the country cooperate with the UN probe. “But many countries do not cooperate with such investigations. The UN doesn’t pressurise them,” he added pointing to double standards. Some countries do not only refuse to cooperate with UN probes, they do not even submit themselves to the Universal Periodic Review. “Equality is important within the UN. If Sri Lanka is being criticised, why not others?” he asked. THE WAR IN SRI LANKA AND PROPAGANDA DEBATES Annex ‘AU’ This Memorandum was sent to Geneva on 14th November and again later and its receipt was acknowledged. The reproduction here contains additional hyperlinks – that is more than the original Memo/GV version. It is also embellished with specific cartographical and pictorial illustrations at one remove: the Cross-References marked “Pics” can be found in the sister-posting in Thuppahi. In my reading, no study of the last phase of Eelam War IV can be conducted by armchair-intellectuals or lawyers with no experience of battles and limited visual and geographical sensibilities. My emphasis on visual aids in the two-volume Tamil Person and State (Colombo, Vijitha Yapa Publications, 2014) is an attempt to overcome my own shortcomings in this area of expertise. Dear Sandra Beidas and OISL Team, As a Sri Lankan Australian and academic I have been collecting and analysing the material on the last phase of the war in Sri Lanka for six years now. I come across new evidence regularly in the midst of misinformation and dis-information that is a facet of the propaganda war that has been sharpening since the LTTE began to retreat in 2008. Since the volume of data is huge, a thorough investigation calls for assiduous work by a team which includes those who are culturally competent and able to discern manipulation. They must transcend the clever tactics of misinformation and fabrication from both sides, with the additional awareness that the Tamil migrant networks outdo the government (GSL) on this front by a proverbial mile.[1]

211

Tamil Civilians as Shield: One of the striking features of reports from international agencies, including the US embassy, in the period late 2008-end 2009 was their criticism of both the LTTE and GSL for the infliction of injury/death on the civilians trapped in the battle theatre. Because criticism was directed at the LTTE for holding the civilians as a shield, these agencies apparently considered their position balanced. Yes, the mass of Tamil civilians — now known to be around 300-320,000 thousand — was used as so many sandbags. However, a further refinement is required in this evaluation: from mid-February 2009 the civilian mass were moved to the coastline so that they constituted a defensive formation designed to prevent a potential amphibious operation that would box the LTTE forces in.[2] Even with such a refinement, this assessment is inadequate. The civilian mass as shield and defensive ‘embankment’ was just one of two pillars in the grand LTTE strategy. Main Strategy: Picture of “Calamity” so as to produce Intervention: The second pillar was the most important one. From mid-2008, as they saw potential defeat staring them in the face, the LTTE and its foreign associates began to cultivate the spectre of “an impending humanitarian disaster.” The civilians corralled as so many sandbags were not only a military barrier; they were meant to encourage international outcries and/or intervention[3] which would enforce a CEASEFIRE. As Puleedevan, a senior LTTE political officer, told his friends in Europe, “just as in Kosovo if enough civilians died… the world would be forced to step in.”[4] From 1990 to 2006 ceasefires and peace talks resulting from initiatives from Colombo in the face of spectacular onslaughts (for example the LTTE attack on Bandaranaike Airport in July 2001) had helped the LTTE recuperate and rebuild. Now, in 2008/09, it was to serve as lifeline. Nay more: as the situation deteriorated further in 2009 the strategy was intended to encourage international intervention to save the Tiger leadership. To repeat: the “impending humanitarian disaster” became a central line of LTTE policy.[5] To this end the greater “the evidence” of casualties and death the better. Fragmentary evidence indicates that on occasions the LTTE shelled its own populace,[6] but I have no capacity to trace the extent of such activity. What I do know is that the LTTE cleverly disseminated (1) stories of hospitals being shelled and (2) evidence of harrowing casualties through pictorial data as well as reports sent by the medical personnel and the Tamil INGO functionaries in their midst. It is striking that in 2009 the US ambassador and major foreign media networks accepted the casualty figures peddled by the medical men without any scepticism.[7] Seated in Colombo in January-May 2009, Reddy, the correspondent for The Hindu, marvelled at the fact that few in this Western circuit wondered how all the medicos had satellite phones and were so accessible.[8] Clearly, they were acting on Tiger orders as Dr. Shanmugarajah’s subsequent (2013) affidavit attests. In mid-May 2009 Reddy and Kanchan Prasad checked out one of the makeshift hospitals within the Last Redoubt (the Second NFZ) which media outlets in the West had highlighted as subject to severe damage (Prasad 2009); but this pictorial disconfirmation remains little known (Pics 25-28). The gullibility that Reddy is alluding to has since been compounded by the fact that subsequent investigators have not sought testimonies from Drs Shanmugarajah and Sathiyamoorthy in Sri Lanka, while the former’s affidavit on the topic of casualties, medical supplies and continuing operations in trying circumstances[9] is rarely tapped as evidence.

212

In falling prey to the spectre of a calamity because of their genuine humanitarian concerns, the Western media and Western governments became powerful allies in the Tiger cause. They were now cat’s-paws dancing to the tune of the LTTE’s grand strategy. Tamilness, Emotion and the Impact of Tales of Woe: A powerful ingredient in the effectiveness of this strategy was the body of tales and woes conveyed to journalists and others in the West by Tamil friends and acquaintances. Not all such tales were lies or exaggerations (Pics 8-9). The war took its toll[10] … (as the LTTE intended by corralling the population in ever decreasing space: Pics 1,2, 6, 7, 24. But the magnitude of casualties was bloated by the figures/images retailed by Tamilnet and other Tamil media circuits. The Tamil migrants who had settled in Western lands are attached to their people and entity. Given their experience of discrimination and pogroms in the past, they are also embittered.[11] Such sentiments cannot be criticised. But such natural feelings served as the foundation for emotion-laden responses to the tales of woe and impending calamity artfully generated by the LTTE network in 2008/09. As the LTTE slid to defeat the distress in migrant circles developed to fever pitch.[12] Anxiety compounded their susceptibility to tales of government bombing and the horrific deaths that were said to be occurring. In their turn these tales influenced British, Canadian and other friends to whom they retailed the plight of their community back home. The impact and force of countless tales purveyed by individual Tamil migrants in their adopted lands must be clinically assessed in any evaluation of the processes surrounding the war. Moving tangentially, let me highlight the force of orally-conveyed rumour among Sinhalese people in inciting communal assaults on Muslim Moors in 1915 and Tamils in 1958, 1977 and 1983. When Citizen Y heard an atrocity tale (a Tamil killing a Sinhalese) from different Sinhalese acquaintances and believed it wholly, thereafter s/he became a powerful medium of “fact.” There is no better inciter than a “True Believer” conveying “an atrocity tale” in emotion-laden voice. From my studies I aver that the impact and ramifications of a true believer’s tale of “atrocity” is deadly.[13] It helped spark pogroms in 1915, 1958, 1977 and 1983. Mutatis mutandis, this is what occurred in many parts of the Western world in late 2008/09. Tamils who were not necessarily Tiger supporters were drawn into the circuits of rumour and became cogs in the currents of “atrocity tale,” shelling of hospitals and mounting deaths. Second and third generation Tamils in London and elsewhere were drawn into frenetic protest activity as the LTTE slid to defeat.[14] One motif in their campaigning THEN was the cry of “genocide.” That cry is still reiterated, cleverly reiterated … now bolstered by statistics and the support of fellow-travellers in the LTTE cause (for e. g, Frances Harrison, Yasmin Sooka, Gordon Weiss, Trevor Grant, Bruce Haigh, David Feith, Lee Scott, Siobhain McDonagh). International Complicity in the LTTE Strategy: The powerful cocktail mounted by the Tamil networks and the many tales of individual Tamil migrants were compounded by the degree to which HR agencies on the one hand and the mainstream Western media networks (e.g. Times in UK, Guardian, New York Times) took up the agitation. These currents of advocacy may have been informed by liberal-radical sympathies for the underdog. With Marie Colvin, a senior hand in The Times of London, the alignment with the LTTE was deeper and etched unto her body via the loss of one eye from an injury sustained from SL Army fire in Sri Lanka as she tried to slip past the internal border in 2001. Seated in London in 2009, she

213

regurgitated the TamilNet propaganda pitch regularly. Take the report she presented in the Sunday Times of 22 March 2009 headlined “Artillery pounds wounded Tamils trapped on beach.” Here, Colvin cites UN and ICRC agencies at different moments and goes on to assert that “the last hospital in the area was forced to close after twice being bombed by the Sri Lankan army.” This hospital was at Puthukkudiyirruppu (PTK). It so happens that an established British-trained historian was embedded with the SL Army’s 58th Regiment from 19-21 March as it consolidated its capture of PTK.[15] He immediately challenged this account by posting images of the hospital and describing the arena. His news report, however, was buried within a Pakistan newspaper and had no bearing on the powerful realms tapped by the Times network. Inequality: This little account underlines the degree to which power inequalities in both the media world and institutional world politics have shaped evaluations of the war in Sri Lanka. The more substantive issue that any present investigation has to address is the degree to which many international agencies and individuals became mouthpieces of clever Tamil nationalist tactics in 2008/09 because they accepted a tapestry composed of half-truths and colossal fabrications interwoven among the indisputable fact of civilian casualties, casualties desired by the LTTE as integral to its grand strategy. In other words, the suggestion here is that their readiness to accept the propaganda pitch of the LTTE and/or Tamil networks from 2008 onwards actually aggravated the situation in the Vanni. What IF: The question that has to be asked is this: if the Western governments and such agencies as Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International had pooled their voices and told the Tamil spokespersons in the West in late 2008 or early 2009 in adamantine voice that the LTTE had to lay down arms and release the corralled civilians and that they would on no account intervene or demand a ceasefire, THEN what would have happened? Would fewer people have died? Why didn’t USA and others demand unconditional surrender from the LTTE? Why did they not support the Sri Lankan Government’s regular call to the LTTE in 2009 to surrender? This outstanding failure renders all these agencies into accomplices in support of an unprecedented act of blackmail by the Tamil Tigers.[16] Compounding the International Failure: The international complicity in the Tamil nationalist enterprise has been sustained by several agencies after the LTTE was overcome. The emphasis on “merciless shelling” by the GSL forces has been underlined by a resort to statistical estimates of large numbers of Tamil civilian dead. The UN Panel of Experts appointed by Ban Ki-Moon and Navy Pillai presented a guesstimate of 40,000 civilian dead as a “credible allegation.” This qualified statement was converted into “credible evidence” by Amnesty International, ICG and high profile media spokespersons (e. g. Kerry O’Brien of ABC) in what appears to be a prima facie instance of massaging and dishonesty.[17] Furthermore, other commentators hit the headlines with estimates of 70,000 and 146,000. The range in these figures has an insidiously powerful effect: a cautious non-partisan listener will discount the last figure as a likely exaggeration and settle on the lesser figure (40,000) as probable fact. It is not a fact. It is a lie that the UN panel of experts has given credence to with its irresponsible speculation regarding civilian casualties. Apart from the failure to address the difficulty of differentiating Tamil civilians from Tiger personnel, none of the analysts touting such figures have attended to the figures of the wounded. In the type of battlefield situation that enveloped all the Tamils trapped in the Vanni Pocket — fighters, other LTTE functionaries and civilians alike — injuries would have occurred widely and the number of those injured would have been greater than those

214

killed. A study in the British Medical Journal showed that in war the “number of people wounded is at least twice the number killed and could be 13 times as high” depending on the conflict type, weapons used, and other factors.[18] If 40,000 civilians died in the Vanni Pocket, there would have been at least 60,000 or, more probably, about 80,000, injured. As it is, in an innovative measure during May-June 2009 the UN agencies in Sri Lanka, marshalled it seems by Gordon Weiss, meticulously compiled figures of the injured IDP Tamils in the hospitals and clinics of the island. They found 18,479 wounded (and estimated 7,721 to have been killed). These statistics are of critical import for any survey of the death toll during the last phase of the war. But, in an act of amnesia, Gordon Weiss has not dwelt on its implications in his subsequent writings on the alleged death toll.[19] Glaring Omissions: Weiss was also on the team assembled by the Public Interest Advocacy Group in Sydney which produced the International Crimes Evidence Report entitled Island of Impunity? The sins of omission committed by this august body[20] are even more startling than Weiss’s amnesia. While utilising a range of material as well as witness testimony, this investigation relies heavily on the report of the UN Panel of Experts (2011). It studiously ignores the damning study of the UN Panel report by a team from the Marga think-tank (2011) which pinpointed its slipshod methodology and the glaring gaps between the body of the study and its own “Executive Summary.” When those espousing a moral line of investigation and accusation do not encompass bodies of data that challenge the direction in which they are heading, there then the peoples’ court of justice raises serious questions. In academia it would be considered dishonesty if an intellectual pontificated on a raging debate between Professors A and B after reading material that was mostly aligned with B. In academic debates the outcomes are less serious than the issues being addressed now by the UN organisations in Geneva. Those with righteousness stamped on their brows cannot be blatantly one-sided in the manner ICEP. Pictorial and Cartographic Dimensions: Most analysts debating the intricacies of the war in its last phase have been, like this author, “armchair office personnel” with no battlefield experience. For this reason cartographic and pictorial evidence becomes especially important. While such perspectives have, indeed, been incorporated into the studies undertaken by the UN Panel of Experts and that of the ICEP, I insist that more detailed and thorough-going pictorial surveys are of central importance. My book, Tamil Person and State: Pictorial, is only one step in this direction. Video evidence is of even greater pertinence. That is why backroom investigators need to absorb the documentaries produced by Al-Jazeera as well as the propaganda videos peddled by Tamil outlets and the government (GSL). These media have to be carefully calibrated with the graphic map work produced by the International Crisis Group, the Daily Mirror and the Ministry of Defence. The video scenarios produced by GSL and its handmaidens, obviously, will not display the type of scenes uncovered by Gordon Weiss where a Tiger officer Ramesh is executed after torture. However, for those who have been totally enmeshed in the incessant propaganda of the Tamil circuits it is educative to dwell on the You-Tube scenes depicting hordes of civilians crossing lagoon, sand and bare land in late April 2009, and again in May 2009 (Pics 20-22, 38-46). The interaction between SL Army personnel and these exhausted and suffering people was not simply manufactured for the benefit of the cameramen.[21] This does not mean that individuals may not have been taken away and and killed; or that individual instances of rape did not occur (Pics 30-37). Such possibilities have to be siphoned out via testimonies.[22] However the video scenes documenting the exodus of people from the Last Redoubt during 19-23 April suggest that the particular description of this set of events by “The Journalist” identified as

215

Lokeesan in Harrison’s book Still Counting the Dead[23] is mostly fabrication and one facet of the continuing agit-prop activity of ardent Tamil nationalists. In brief, then, scepticism, caution and thoroughness must be the investigative watchwords. So, too, must proportionality. The rough estimates of dead Tamil personnel (Tigers and civilians together) must be set against the figure of 295,873 who survived — a considerable figure in the circumstances; while notice must be taken of the massive relief effort from February 2009 which catered to the needs of the survivors in the detention centres where military men, civilian GSL functionaries and selected local NGOs and several INGOs worked tirelessly in what I consider a remarkable security-cum-welfare operation which stretched over the months 2009 into years.[24] Likewise, studies and debates on the death toll as well as the topic of “disappearances” in the twenty-four months of 2008-09 must proceed pragmatically and also embrace (a) computations of the natural death toll (inclusive of snake bite deaths)[25] in any large population and (b) the fact that the bodies of a considerable number of people who succumbed in the jungles or were buried in their safety-holes would have been subject to irretrievable decomposition or become fodder for carrion and termites. These may be distressing issues, but the topic demands a disciplined, culturally-attuned and comprehensive study, one that is attentive to the possibility of manipulation from all sides. It is as distressing as puzzling to me that serious lacunae have bedevilled the previous UN surveys. This conclusion can be gleaned from the most thorough-going study of the war in hand, namely, The Numbers Game, which is largely the work of an aeronautical engineer educated in the West, a gentleman who wishes to remain anonymous for reasons of security. This study (see IDAG 2012) is bulky and replete with Appendices. For that reason it is as imposing as difficult to comprehend. However, Noble and Colman have provided useful summaries. I urge the OHCHR to consult these works. My own submission here has a “select bibliography” referring to items cited, while supplementing its foundations through hyperlinks. Because the HR world has been deliberately selective in its surveys I conclude by itemizing essential bibliographical readings that have not usually been used in investigations and are not identified in my text or bibliography. EXPOSING THE LIES: WHY THE ‘JOINT STATEMENT’ BETWEEN SRI LANKA AND UN SECRETARY GENERAL IS CONTINUOUSLY REFERRED TO Annex ‘AV’ There is a reason why there is constant reference to a supposed ‘joint statement’ issued between Sri Lanka and the UN signed by the Sri Lankan President and the UN Secretary General. The effort is to create a notion that a ‘contract’ prevails as a result of that ‘joint statement’ binding enough to warrant the appointment of the Panel of Experts, to make public their report, to have that report form the basis for the Resolutions and provide the foundation on which the UNHRC head could carry out an investigation against Sri Lanka. Obviously, a lot of minds and hours had gone into contriving the masterplan. The question, next needs to be asked is how valid and legal is this masterplan?

216

Firstly, what needs to be accepted is that an investigation against a UN member state can take place based on the following scenarios: -If it is endorsed by the UN General Assembly -If it is endorsed by the UN Security Council -It can also be done as a self-initiative by the UN Secretary General based on 2 criteria: -UN Charter Article 99 which says The Secretary General may bring to the attention of the Security Council any matter which in his opinion may threaten the maintenance of international peace and security.” -Based on a contract or an agreement with the country in question. We are well aware that NONE of the reports to date has been either endorsed, approved or commissioned by either the UN General Assembly or the UN Security Council. As for UN Charter Article 99, though Ban-Ki Moon’s advisors contemplated this option, it was set aside for the simple reason that the UN Security General had no basis to commission a report because the situation in Sri Lanka posed no threat to ‘the maintenance of international peace and security’. With the conflict over, LTTE ground force eliminated Ban-Ki Moon would have looked a fool to suggest a report citing Article 99. Even Sri Lanka’s worse critic will not be able to provide a single example of how Sri Lanka’s ‘accountability process’ can pose a threat to international peace! Therefore, the next option was to entice Sri Lanka and lure it to agreeing to a ‘contract’ that would attempt to bind the country to enable an investigation to be conducted. We can but wonder how many of our own officials would have been enticed or manipulated into this deal in accepting to go with the flow in what has turned out to be a devious plan to craft out a war crimes investigation against Sri Lanka and select leaders. The projected ‘contract’ being promoted as prima facie case to establish the UNSG’s right to appoint a panel to investigate Sri Lanka is based on a flimsy concluding para to a joint statement signed on 23 May 2009 after he arrived in Sri Lanka within days of the conclusive defeat of the LTTE. That flimsy sentence in the joint statement reads thus: The Secretary General underlined the importance of an accountability process for addressing violations of international humanitarian and human rights law. The Government will take measures to address those grievances” (Nowhere does the Sri Lankan Government commit to undertaking an investigation nor does the GOSL agree to an international investigation) Let’s not fool ourselves into believing these lines equate to a contract. These lines have absolutely no legal basis to argue as a legal contract between Sri Lanka and the UNSG that Sri Lanka has undertaken to even do a domestic inquiry.

217

Nevertheless, we should begin to understand the reason for the inundated reference to the ‘joint statement’ and attempting to project it as a ‘contract’ that the GOSL has breached and violated that warranted the UNSG to take action by establishing a Panel of Experts and thereafter collaborating with the UNHRC to kickstart the Resolutions and ultimate investigation. Every step of the exercise resonates a scheme, a manipulation, lies and unethical practice within the halls of the UN. The manipulative nature of the UNSG’s office in collusion with the UNHRC office needs to be publicly exposed. Far too many statements have been made public without scrutiny and international condemnation. Failure of Sri Lankan officials to stand up for what is right and on behalf of their country over diplomacy and fear of upsetting fellow nations has led to the abysmal situation Sri Lanka now has fallen into. Why should anyone feel shy to tell the truth if the truth needs to be told? Why would any country feel upset if they too stand for truth and wish to be part of honest governance? Why were statements like In March 2010, in the absence of Government initiative on the issue, the UN informed the Government and Member States of plans to establish a UN Panel of Experts on accountability in Sri Lanka.” not condemned publicly? The statement is an utter lie. The Appointment of the Panel of Experts, the mandate given to them, the choice of the Panel had nothing to do with the UN General Assembly or the UN Security Council. It was solely a self-initiative by the UN Secretary General. The Panel of Experts was not appointed by or endorsed by the UN General Assembly and no report has any right to give the impression that it was. The Panel of Expert Report has no right to refer itself as a UN report. This scenario needs to be conveyed across the diplomatic channels to all Members of the UN so that they can be made to understand the nature with which the UN and certain officials are signaling out Sri Lanka in an obvious attempt to create precedents that would be detrimental to other nations of the developing world and enemies of the West. It is for these reasons that the UN General Assembly and nations that are not mere armchair members attending annual sessions begin to realize what a monster the UN is shaping itself to becoming. It is no better a time for the developing world to start thinking of formulating a new world body that does not function to the dictates of a handful of nations and their lobbies based on the perks and remunerations that crosses hands. With the calls for an Asian Union comprising Russia, China, India and all nations of Asia it is for think tanks to start drawing up a new world entity burying for good a biased and failed UN. UNHRC INVESTIGATION – IF LTTE IS FOUND GUILTY…. WHO AMONG THE LIVING WILL BE HELD ACCOUNTABLE? Annex ‘AW’

218

This question needs to be asked and answered some time or the other and sooner the better. We are well aware that the LTTE ground leadership is no more including the LTTE leader – V. Prabakaran. However, over the years there have been a host of people living in Sri Lanka, living overseas who have been directly and indirectly part of the LTTE. Unless these names are out in the open identified as ‘members’ of the LTTE Eelam ideology and declared LTTE partners in crime, the entire UNHRC investigation is nothing but a sham and one that is being set up to take ONLY the GOSL to the dock. Therefore, if ‘both sides’ has any meaning at all we need to put a list of all those that have been by their actions linked to the LTTE, by their association part of the LTTE, by accepting LTTE funds been associated with the LTTE over the years and it need not necessarily be confined to 2002 – 2009 though we may have to offer some leniency to those who openly gave up association with the LTTE. Who will be contenders to take the fall and be held accountable for LTTE crimes? TNA? TNA is an unregistered alliance formed in 2001 just before the Ceasefire Agreement was signed comprising the ACTC – All Ceylon Tamil Congress, the EPRLF – Eelam People’s Revolutionary Liberation Front, TELO – Tamil Eelam Liberation Organization, TULF – Tamil United Liberation Front. It was with the LTTE’s influence that TNA was voted into Parliament. What are the examples that showcases TNA-LTTE links. In its 2001 manifesto TNA claimed ‘We have also consistently asserted that any attempt to draw a distinction between the LTTE and the Tamil people was meaningless”‘”‚¦‘unless meaningful negotiations are held with the LTTE no just solution can be found to the Tamil national question and that such negotiations should be held immediately ONLY with the LTTE”‘ - while TNA also held the view that ‘no parallel negotiations should take place with any other Tamil political formation”‘. The TULF, ACTC, TELO, EPRLF in 2001 demanded that the GOSL ‘lift the proscription imposed on the LTTE”‘ and moreover that such ‘proscription does not constitute an impediment to the free and full participation of the LTTE at such negotiations on behalf of the Tamil nationality”‘. TNA in 2001 concluded that for any meaningful solution to the ‘TAMIL NATIONAL QUESTION”‘ had to be based on 4 principles highlighted at the 13th July 1985 Thimpu Talks in Bhutan (Between GOSL and LTTE): 1. To recognize Tamils of Sri Lanka as a distinct nationality 2. To recognize the identified Tamil Homeland and guarantee its territorial integrity 3. To recognize the inalienable right of self-determination of the Tamil nation.

219

4. To recognize the right to full citizenship and other fundamental democratic rights of all Tamils who look upon the island as their country. In 2001 the TNA comprised of the TULF, ACTC, TELO, EPRLF. Their 2001 manifesto put their aims and objectives as § Immediate lifting of economic embargo in parts of northeast province § Withdrawal of residential and travel restrictions of Tamil nationals § Immediate cessation of war currently waged in northeast § Immediate commencement of negotiations with LTTE and third party. The TNA manifesto of 2004 comprised the political parties of TULF, ACTC, TELO and EPRLF. The 2004 manifesto also spoke of establishing independent Tamil Eelam based on inalienable right to self-determination. The manifesto also spoke about ‘genocidal attacks on the Tamil people”‘ though why the Tamil people continue to live with the Sinhalese despite ‘genocidal”‘ attacks remains unanswered. TNA also says ‘in order to safeguard the life and liberty of the Tamil race and to establish its birthright for self-determination, the Tamil Nation having being pushed to the unavoidable state of armed conflict, as the only way, the war not only broadened but advanced under the generalship of the Tiger”‘s leader Hon.Pirapaharan”‘ (while Tamil alliance politicians for fear of LTTE lived with the Sinhalese in Colombo and cared not a penny for the life or liberty of Tamils in LTTE areas!) TNA’s 2004 election manifesto reads thus “Accepting the LTTE’s leadership as the national leadership of ‘Tamil Eelam’ Tamils and the Liberation Tigers as the sole and authentic representative of the Tamil people, let us devote our full cooperation for the ideals of the Liberation Tigers’ struggle with honesty and steadfastness. Let us endeavour determinedly, collectively as one group, one nation, one country, transcending race and religious differences, under the leadership of the LTTE, for a life of liberty, honour and justice for the Tamil people.” TNA put forward 10 resolutions in its 2004 manifesto 1. Political solution to the Tamil national problem based on Tamil Homeland and Tamils right to self-determination 2. TNA position on Muslims because they speak Tamil mother tongue TNA wishes that any solution to Tamil national problem should address the cultural, economic and security concerns of the Muslims – thus ISGA proposals related to Muslims. (what about the Muslims the Tamils chased or the Muslims massacred in Kattankudy) 3. Sinhala Nation should accept the ISGA ‘excellent”‘ proposals by LTTE to rebuild the Tamil country

220

4. The high security zones and army camps should be removed 5. The armed forces ‘interdiction and oppression”‘ must be lifted and allow Tamils to move freely in their ‘homeland”‘ 6. International community should directly assist humanitarian needs and improve economic life of the Tamil nation. 7. Political prisoners to be released 8. International judicial inquiry on the fate of the disappeared by the armed forces and police in ‘our homeland”‘. 9. Provisions of ceasefire agreement to be completed fulfilled 10. THIS IS THE BEST LINE OF THE MANIFESTO! – ‘The LTTE has for the past two years put up with the violent, surly behaviour of the armed forces without impairing the conditions for peace and observing the ceasefire and acting steadfastly and firmly towards the path of peace”‘. Hence the international community should remove restrictions on LTTE because it is the ‘authentic sole representative of the Tamil people”‘ - was there not close to 10,000 LTTE ceasefire violations? Can Tamils understand why it is the TNA that has put all Tamils into the LTTE killing basket? That”‘s not all that the TNA said about the LTTE. TNA goes on to say that it is ‘accepting LTTE”‘s leadership as the national leadership of the Tamil Eelam Tamils and the Liberation Tigers as the sole and authentic representatives of the Tamil people”‘ - do we really need to ask Tamils why they would not come forward to deny this claim made by the TNA? How many Tamils agree or do not agree when TNA says ‘let us devote our full cooperation for the ideals of the Liberation Tigers struggle with honesty and steadfastness”‘‚¦”‘let us work side by side with the LTTE”‘. The manifestos were not written by TNA under duress. It is clear that LTTE-TNA are one and the same. In its 2010 Manifesto, the TNA refers to the LTTE it as the ‘sole military outfit that fought for a separate homeland for the Tamils”‘ as well as the 2002 Cease Fire Agreement based on a set of principles known as the ‘Oslo Communique”‘ which again referred to ‘internal self-determination in areas of historical habitation of the Tamil-speaking Peoples, based on a federal structure within a united Sri Lanka”‘. There is need to Investigate: * TNA Parliamentarians attending pro-LTTE events abroad and locally throughout 30 years * TNA Parliamentarians speaking from LTTE stages, delivering speeches that echo separatist sentiment. * TNA Parliamentarians paying homage to dead LTTE suicide cadres

221

* TNA Parliamentarians communicating and liaising with LTTE fronts overseas * Foreign mission briefings/country data on Sri Lanka that describes ‘TNA as a pro-LTTE party’ while international media too carries the same description * 2004 EU Election Observation Mission Chief John Cushnahan released the EU report on June 17, 2004 clearly establishing the LTTE-TNA alliance: Quote: Firstly, the LTTE intended that no other rival Tamil party (or Tamil candidate from the mainstream political alliances) to the TNA would be able to claim to represent Tamil interests. A chilling message to this effect was sent early in the campaign when a UNP candidate and an EPDP activist were murdered. Incidents such as this seriously restricted the right of the parties other than the TNA to campaign freely in the Northern and Eastern Districts. During the 2004 elections, the major incidents of violence was perpetrated by the LTTE, whereas at the earlier elections; the primary source of the violence (although not all), were the two largest political parties. Unquote * 2009 statement by Anandasangaree (President/Secretary of TULF) to the President of Sri Lanka: “Democratic Tamil National Alliance considers the TNA, as the first and the worst enemy of the Tamil People. They should take full responsibility, among many other matters, for the loss of several thousands of lives and for causing injuries for many more….. All have become paupers now. They will find hardly anything left when they return to their homes one day. All these or at least 90 per cent of these could have been saved and total displacement could have been avoided if only the TNA had the forethought to advise the LTTE to release the people from their grip, to go anywhere they liked. The TNA is blamed for this because, when everyone, every organization, every country, the EU, the UN etc. had made this request specifically, only the TNA kept on asking for the war to stop” Guilty by association In investigating and establishing the links with LTTE-TNA every killing and act crime committed by the LTTE automatically incriminates the TNA as being guilty by association. LTTE’s crimes include suicide missions, destruction of civilian property, premeditated targeting of civilians, denying fundamental rights under the UN Charter to Tamil men, women and even children by forcibly recruiting them as terrorists, denying children their right to life, right to live with parents, right to education and right to freedom of movement, banks heists, political assassinations, narcotic trade, human smuggling and a host of other crimes which TNA by association with LTTE becomes culpable for. Investigate! COLLECTIVE RESPONSIBILITY – COLLECTIVE GUILT Even thepresent Chief Minister is quoted as having said ‘Prabakaran is not a terrorist. He is a hero and a warrior who fount for the liberation of the Tamil Nation’.

222

Then there are a list of many others living overseas and top on that list is Adele Balasingham, the head trainer of the LTTE suicide cadres. Her crime includes criminal accountability for instructing people to commit suicide by biting the cyanide capsule given to each trainee. Scores of Tamils men, women and children committed suicide by biting the cyanide capsule and criminal proceedings must be launched as even between 2002-2009 LTTE cadres took their lives. There are also many other LTTE fronts and the current ban by the Sri Lankan Government naming these organizations as LTTE fronts under the UNSC Resolution is sufficient to connect them to OHCHR investigation and be held accountable for LTTE crimes. So too are non-Tamil LTTE who had been enjoying regular disbursements from the LTTE kitty to be part of the LTTE propaganda channel. Their names are well known but need to be officially put out into the public domain and they too must take the fall and accept accountability for LTTE crimes that the UNHRC is investigation. The long and short of it is that we cannot accept the death of LTTE’s leaders and the ground leadership as an excuse for LTTE crimes to go unaccounted. There have to be a host of people lined up to accept accountability at the end of the OHCHR report when they cannot omit from declaring LTTE as accountable for crimes even it is those that they will hold within the time frame of 2002-2009. The people of Sri Lanka must compile those that should take that fall and be held accountable first. SRI LANKA WAR CRIMES ALLEGATIONS CAN HOLD WATER ONLY IF THE ACCUSERS CAN NAME THE DEAD Annex ‘AX’ The efforts to bring down the curtain to the investigation on Sri Lanka will be to pin the argument of command responsibility thus enabling key heads already named to be indicted for war crimes, crimes against humanity and so forth. Nevertheless, for any war crime allegations to hold water there must first be bodies of dead to prove a crime has been committed. As things stand neither do we have bodies nor do we have names of the dead. What a preposterous situation when we have only allegations but nothing to substantiate them except experts from overseas spending colossal amounts of someone’s money to produce reports of ‘credible witnesses’ but none of them able to produce even a skeleton! Let’s first take a look at who are making the accusations • -All the LTTE fronts that the GOSL has proscribed. Incidentally they ran the global LTTE propaganda against the GOSL accusing the

forces of killing civilians. It would be extremely interesting if the UN Panel puts out accounts of Tamil civilian submissions with witness names on the manner LTTE fired at fleeing civilians, LTTE abducted children of the Tamil civilians and gave them training and put them into the battleground, LTTE on the pretext of giving clothes fixed suicide vests onto clueless 10 year olds and sent them back to the civilians and blew them via remote control. All these accounts have been sent to the UN by these Tamils themselves and what is interesting is that they have openly declared their willingness to appear before the panel and give evidence against LTTE. This would shatter all accusations that Tamil civilians were killed by Sri Lankan army.

•

223

• -Gordon Weiss has lost all credibility for his guestimates keep changing with every book launch and pro-LTTE panel discussion • • -Frances Harrison has also inflated figures beyond 100,000 civilian deaths with no evidence • • -Foreign Parliamentarians linked to proscribed LTTE fronts are also parroting the same figures quoted by LTTE sources • • -Media channels have also quoted numbers from the above without questioning their lack of evidence or giving balanced account • What are the estimated figures? It is crucial to keep in mind that we do not know how many were LTTE and how many were civilians that did not take part in any form of hostility. From accounts by Tamils who have sent submissions to the UN Panel, they have admitted that their children were given 5 days of training and put into combat areas leaving them vulnerable to death. If so the Sri Lankan forces cannot be held responsible for these unfortunate deaths. • -UN Panel of Experts in March 2011 could only say that ‘there could have been as many as 40,000 civilian deaths” – could have been

is not tantamount to claiming that 40,000 were killed • -UNHRC Head on 13th March Rights stated that 2800 civilians may have been killed and more than 7000 injured since 20 January 2009” • • -United Nations Country Team Assessment declared 7721 killed and 18,479 injured from August 2008 to 13 May 2009 • • -Satellite Analysis by American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS) discovered only 3 graves highest in which had 1346

buried and one was a LTTE graveyard with 960 dead. Why has the satellites failed to pick 40,000 or more deaths if they did occur? • • -Enumeration of Vital events 2011 conducted by the Dept of Census and Statistics on the Northern Province have put the conflict

related deaths at 7896 which includes LTTE killed in action. • • -Statistical remuneration of deaths occurring between 2005 and 2009 in the districts of Jaffna, Mannar, Vavuniya, Mullaitivu,

Kilinochchi have given an estimate of 8649 deaths. • • -UNICEF supported Family Tracing and Reunification Unit in its June 2011 survey of North had only 2564 tracing applications of which

676 were children and 1888 adults while 64% of requests were from parents who reported that LTTE abducted their children. • • -Population estimates by Government, UN, NGOs established the highest population figure of 300,000. The Security Forces saved

293,000 which leaves 7000 to be accounted for (this includes LTTE too) •

224

• -What is interesting is that the Foreign Agencies that were living and located in LTTE controlled areas have been able to give wrong estimates of civilians in the North while the Government Agent in Mullaitivu had placed the estimated civilians at 305,000:

• 12 UN Resident Coordinator – 120,000 – 180,000 13 Centre for Humanitarian Agencies – 75,000-150,000 14 UN Under Secretary General for Humanitarian Affairs and Emergency Relief – 150,000 – 190,000 15 World Food Program – 210,000 16 Humanitarian Community – 250,000 17 Government Agent in Mullaitivu (Jan 2009) – 305,000

The Consultative Committee on Humanitarian Assistance (CCHA) was established in 2006 and members of this Committee that

included foreign envoys met weekly throughout the height of the conflict which next questions why none of them gave a proper estimate of the civilian figures before the final battle!

ICRC Director of Operations Pierre Krahenbuhl (21 April 2009, press briefing, Sri Lanka) The hostilities are now taking place in a very narrow stretch of land along the eastern coastline of Sri Lanka. And within that narrow stretch, which had been declared a ‘no-fire zone’ by the government, tens of thousands of civilians remain trapped. At present we put their estimate at 50,000,” 28days before the LTTE was eliminated the ICRC placed the number of civilians as 50,000. -Indian embedded Journalist Murali Reddy on 16th May 2009, said that 50,000 civilians had escaped and corresponds with UN

Spokesman Gordon Weiss estimate of 50,000 civilians on 13 May 2009 after which President Rajapakse announced an unconditional surrender which LTTE refused.

-We need to note that ICRC, Gordon Weiss and Murali Reddy declared that on 16th May 2009 50,000 civilians had escaped. Therefore, while anyone and everyone has a right to make allegations and give numbers of death without the dead or the names of the dead or even the skeletons of these dead none of these numbers can hold water and on a ‘may be’ or ‘could be’ the UN panel cannot pin ‘collective responsibility’ or ‘command responsibility’ against Sri Lanka and people they are targeting to be named as war criminals. Let’s be fair, if war crimes did take place, there has to be deaths, if there are deaths, there have to be bodies and every dead body has to have a name, names of the dead can be given easily by family or there has to be some evidence that they lived (residence address, National ID copy, passport etc) so where are these vital evidence to prove that people had lived to have died.

225

A body to be buried needs a grave that is 6×4 – a mass grave would take time to dig and it is impossible to imagine even for those with the wildest of imaginations soldiers digging up mass graves while artillery and fire were coming from all corners! Therefore, the UN Panel first need to explain why it has not taken into account -7721 deaths quoted by the UN Country Team -7896 deaths quoted by the GOSL Dept of Census and Statistics Next the UN Panel has to establish that 40,000 or more actually died and if the UN Panel says they died they need to name who has died. We are not going to accept numbers without proper factual account of the dead. Wrong guestimates were used in Yugoslavia, Libya and scores of other countries that were targeted for ‘humanitarian intervention’. If UN is adamant on pinning war crimes charges based on ‘command responsibility’ bring out the dead by naming them first. THE PRESIDENTIAL COMMISSION ON MISSING PERSONS:TRENDS, PRACTICES AND IMPLICATIONS Annex ‘AY’ The Presidential Commission to Investigate into Complaints Regarding Missing Persons (the Commission) was established on 15th August 2013 under Gazette No. 1823/42. Over a year into its mandate, the Commission continues to operate under circumstances that raise serious concerns in respect of the search for truth, justice and accountability in Sri Lanka. The Government of Sri Lanka (GoSL) depicts the Commission not only as its primary instrument to address the grievances of the families of the disappeared, but also since the expansion of its mandate, as the sole mechanism for addressing war time violations of international human rights and humanitarian law, amongst others. The present critique by the Centre for Policy Alternatives (CPA) captures key issues and trends observed during public sittings of the Commission and the perceptions of affected communities and civil society who have observed and engaged with the present process. At the very outset CPA notes that the Commission, operating under the Commissions of Inquiry apparatus, is structurally flawed, given its dependence on the Executive for appointments, financing and follow up action. Having observed a string of failed State initiatives at transitional justice in recent years and the lack of progress with past Commissions appointed by successive governments, CPA calls for immediate steps to be taken for legal and policy reform that provides for a genuine and credible domestic process at truth seeking, justice and accountability. Failure in this regard further confirms the inability of domestic processes to address grievances in a post war context and strengthens calls for international investigations. The brief consists of three sections. The first looks into technical issues of the present Commission and critiques the operational processes and practices of the Commission. The second explores the broader issues embedded in the structure within which the Commission operates, while the final section analyses the trend perceptions and concerns and their implications for the Commission’s work.

226

Read as a PDF here Dissappearances-COI-Dec-2014-FINAL CONTROLLING NGOS: “DEFENCE MINISTRY ACTING BEYOND THE MANDATE” SAYS LAWYERS COLLECTIVE Annex ‘AZ’ “The Ministry of Defence does not enjoy any specific legal authority under any statute whatsoever to control freedom of speech and association of citizens, who act collectively through civil society organisations. In the circumstances, it is clear from the Press Release issued by the Defence Ministry has acted beyond its mandate”, says the Lawyers Collective. SRI LANKA BANS NGOS ENGAGING IN PUBLIC COMMUNICATIONS AND CONDUCTING TRAINING: The Government of Sri Lanka today banned Non Governmental Organisations holding press conferences, couducting work shops, issuing press releases ect. This act amount to clear violation of number of fundermantal rights, including right to information, freedom of expression. Number of NGOs told Sri Lanka Breif that theywill chellenge the circuler in courts. THE GOVERNMENT CANNOT VIOLATE THE RIGHTS ACTING THROUGH THE MOD: Democratic Governance, Voluntary Associations and People’s Rights by Friday Forum– Some months ago the Friday Forum issued a public statement that reflected on certain emerging trends in our country, and posed the question whether Sri Lanka is moving towards authoritarianism. Though circulated widely, this statement did not receive extensive publicity in the national newspapers. A recent letter issued “To all NGOs” by the Director/Registrar of an Institution known as the “National Secretariat for NGOs” located in the Ministry of Defence confirms our concerns that the government is on a dangerous path that will soon erode every basic norm of democratic governance. This letter of the National Secretariat is titled “NGOs acting beyond their mandate.” It states that “it has been revealed that certain NGOs conduct press conferences, workshops, training of journalists, and dissemination of press releases.” These are activities which are described as “beyond their (NGOs) mandate.” The letter demands that “all NGOs should prevent from such unauthorised activism with immediate effect.” This circular clearly violates the rights of the people under our Constitution, as well as legally binding international treaties ratified by the Sri Lankan State before this government assumed office. The rights of the Sri Lankan people to freedom of association, access to information, and freedom of speech and expression, are guaranteed in specific provisions of our Constitution. They have been interpreted by our Supreme Court and accepted as critically important areas for realising the fundamental rights of our people. In Channa Pieris v. The Attorney General (1994) Justice A R B Amerasinghe expressed the views of the Supreme Court and stated that the citizen’s right to freedom of association (under Article 14 (1) (c) of our Constitution) is linked to other freedoms, including freedom of thought and conscience (Article 10), and the right to free speech and expression (Article 14 (1) (a). Group associations, he said, advances these rights. In the Janaghosha case (1994) Justice Mark Fernando said that these articles of the Constitution “recognise the right of every Sri Lankan to be different; to think differently; and to have and to express different opinions – not merely a right to dissent privately in silence but to communicate disagreement openly by word,

227

conduct or action by peaceful and lawful means”. “Dissent or disagreement,” said Justice Fernando “is a corner stone of the Constitution….” His Lordship stated that democracy requires not merely that dissent be tolerated, but that it be encouraged. In Wanigasuriya v. S I Pieris (1985) GPS de Silva (subsequently Chief Justice) said that “a democratic polity … implies that consent (of the governed to be governed) shall be grounded in adequate information and discussion aided by the widest possible dissemination of information from diverse and antagonistic sources.” Popular terms such as “accountability” and “transparency” are at times used with reference to NGOs by unscrupulous persons both within and outside the Government, to promote their own agendas. We must remember that NGOs are voluntary associations of people for purposes that they define for themselves. They are established in Sri Lanka according to diverse frameworks including under the Companies Act 2007. Some NGOs have registered under the controversial Social Services Act, and agreed to provide information on their budgets and work programs. NGOs are accountable like private persons only if they break the law of the land. The existing laws and procedures should not restrict NGOs and the people’s fundamental rights under the Constitution, including the freedoms referred to in the above decisions of the Supreme Court. If there exist laws and practices that contravene these basic principles of democracy and our right to freedom of association and expression, then such laws should be repealed or amended, and such practices abandoned. Our laws and practices should always be within the principles of the fundamental rights assured by our constitution and the international standards to which our country has subscribed to better secure the rights of our people. The duty of the Police Police officers, at the same time, have a duty as officers of the state to ensure that people can exercise their right to assemble together peacefully and enjoy their right of free exchange of information and views. Such assemblies must be protected from invasion by miscreants or other uninvited persons, as liberty of the individual needs as much protection from other individuals as from governments. The Government and the current Foreign Minister consistently refer to the rights of a sovereign Sri Lankan State to resist national and international review of the government’s performance on human rights. They do not seem to know, or are deliberately concealing from the public, the fact that the concept of the sovereignty of a State has been modified significantly by many decades of development in Constitutional and International Human Rights law. State is bound by international law A state which has a national constitution guaranteeing the enforceability of citizen’s fundamental rights, and a state which is bound by international law under treaties that it has voluntarily signed, must fulfill legal obligations to citizens under these instruments. The Sri Lankan state has surrendered sovereignty to the extent that it has voluntarily agreed to have its performance reviewed both by its citizens and the community of member states of the United Nations. The government, acting through the Defence establishment, cannot violate the rights of the people that elected it to public office, and justify these violations by referring to state sovereignty. Our Constitution says very clearly that “In the Republic of Sri Lanka sovereignty is in the people, and includes the powers of government (legislative power exercised by Parliament, executive power exercised by the President) fundamental rights and the franchise” – Article 3 and 4 (a) and (b). The perception that any critical review of government performance by the people including by NGOs and civil society is an act of treachery, which undermines the independence and sovereignty of our country, has been rejected time and again in interpretations of our national Constitution by respected judges of the apex court, the Supreme Court of Sri Lanka.

228

NGOs are important actors that have recognised legal status under national and international law, to raise awareness on issues concerning governments’ performance relating to human rights protection and fulfillment. Sri Lanka as a member state of the United Nations must conform to these current norms on NGO and civil society participation, and their role and responsibilities in evaluating the human rights situation in our country. All the activities mentioned in this letter of the NGO Secretariat fall within and not outside the mandate of NGOs, supporting critically important citizens’ rights. The criticism of the circular after it was sent to NGOs has led to contradictory statements by officials. The External Affairs Ministry issued a strong statement justifying the circular as a legal order because NGO’s were failing to follow guidelines set for registration under the Social Services Act. However, Prime Minister D. M. Jayaratna stated in Parliament that the circular from the Ministry of Defence was not an order but a circular of “instruction” with a “request” to act within the guidelines that NGOs had accepted at the time of registration. The public should note that the circular quoted above states that “NGOs should prevent from such unauthorised activism with immediate effect”. Is this the Prime Minister’s idea of language of gentle persuasion or is this a military order from the Defence Establishment? The policy-making establishment of NGO Secretariat and the Ministry of Defence seem unaware of the laws of our country, or are deliberately adopting policies that violate them. It is shocking that the Prime Minister and Ministry of External Affairs are seeking to justify these violations and the Defence Ministry circular on NGOs, supporting an erosion of our Constitution and the law of the land on the peoples’ right to freedom of association, freedom of speech and information. The recently issued and obnoxious circular to NGOs must be challenged by the people of this country. We must not legitimise this public rejection of the norms of democratic governance by a government that has been elected to hold office on behalf of the people. We cannot allow an erosion of the Constitutional guarantees on peoples’ rights by a defence establishment that is steadily and dangerously acquiring a status and role in government that is both illegal and dictatorial. RELAX MILITARY SURVEILLANCE OVER TAMIL POPULATION Annex ‘BA’ (http://oneislandtwonationsblogspotcom.typepad.com/blog/2014/11/us-trained-commander-of-sl-military-steps-up-surveillance-on-jaffna-

university.html)

US-trained commander of SL military steps up surveillance on Jaffna University

[TamilNet, Saturday, 15 November 2014, 09:37 GMT]

The commander of the occupying military of genocidal Sri Lanka in Jaffna, Major General Udaya Perera, who was trained and awarded in the US Army

War College in 2012, after his role in the genocidal onslaught in 2009 followed by counter-insurgency foreign service, is engaged in creating fear

psychosis among the Tamil youth, ex-LTTE members and the civil society in North before Tamil Heroes Day, Tamil activists in Jaffna say. Two

229

‘surveillance centers’ have been created near the University of Jaffna in recent days at Naachchimaar koayil and at Kaladdi Junction, obtaining civilian

houses within 500 meters and one km from the university premises. The primary task given to the intelligence operatives is to block activists and

students from marking Tamil Heroes Day on November 27.

Udaya Perera had summoned all intelligence officers from various parts of the Jaffna peninsula last week to Palaali military base. Specific instructions

were given to the intelligence operatives on how to create fear psychosis among the public to block any attempt to mark the Tamil Heroes Day in

Jaffna.

Armed SL military soldiers have been posted every 10 feet along the streets in the vicinity of the University since Friday.

Informed sources told TamilNet Saturday that the Vice Chancellor Vasanthy Arasaratnam has been reluctant this year to shut down the university,

citing possible protests from the administration, teachers and the students.

Last year, the University administration in Jaffna was under criticism for obeying to the instructions by the SL military to shut down the university

during the Heroes Day week.

However, a final decision has not been made. But, the SL military, by deploying military personnel, is exerting pressure on the administration of the

university, the sources further said.

The normalcy required for the education activities at the University of Jaffna has been seriously compromised by the increased deployment of Sri

Lankan military personnel in the vicinity, including the main entrance of the university, said Amirthalingam Rajakumaran, the president of the Jaffna

University Teachers Association (JUTA), who met the press at the University premises on Friday.

“The entire university community has come under harassment by the deployment of SL military personnel in the vicinity of the University of Jaffna,”

he said.

(http://www.uktamilnews.com/?p=6760)

TNPF office surrounded by Sri Lankan military personnel

Tamil National People’s Front’s office has been surrounded by Sri Lankan military personnel since this afternoon at 4pm local time, the party said.

The military surveillance comes on the day before the Tamil national remembrance day, Maaveerar Naal, and on the day of the birthday of the LTTE

leader, V. Prabhakaran.

230

Intelligence officers have been stationed at the office door, the party said, adding that as a result local residents are afraid to leave their houses due to

the overwhelming military presence.

Earlier this week, the TNPF issued a statement calling on the international community to provide protection for Jaffna University students and staff

facing death threats by unidentified persons, thought to be connected to the Sri Lankan military.

(http://www.tamilguardian.com/article.asp?articleid=12961)

Ananthy Sasitharan's office under military surveillance

The office of the TNA Northern Provincial Council (NPC) member, Ananthy Sasitharan is under military surveillance, locals sources said.

"The army is involved in unusual patrol activities in front of my office in Sulipuram and military intelligence are monitoring the office from shops

opposite," Sasitharan told the Uthayan.

The heightened military activity comes amid the Tamil nation's annual remembrance day commemoration on November 27 - Maaveerar Naal.

Earlier in the day, trees were planted in the North-East in memory of fallen LTTE cadre.

The Sri Lankan government has attempted to stifle any commemoration of Maaveerar Naal since the end of the military conflict, with extensive

military deployment across the North-East, and particularly in Jaffna, at this time of year.

"On this special day, amid military occupation, we plant trees in memory of Maaveerar," Sasitharan tweeted.

(http://www.tamilguardian.com/article.asp?articleid=12950)

TNPF office surrounded by Sri Lankan military personnel

The Tamil National People’s Front's office has been surrounded by Sri Lankan military personnel since this afternoon at 4pm local time, the party

said.

The military surveillance comes on the day before the Tamil national remembrance day, Maaveerar Naal, and on the day of the birthday of the LTTE

leader, V. Prabhakaran.

Intelligence officers have been stationed at the office door, the party said, adding that as a result local residents are afraid to leave their houses due to

the overwhelming military presence.

231

Earlier this week, the TNPF issued a statement calling on the international community to provide protection for Jaffna University students and staff

facing death threats by unidentified persons, thought to be connected to the Sri Lankan military.

TISL URGES MR TO REVOKE GAZETTE NOTICE CALLING MILITARY FOR CIVIL ADMINISTRATION Annex ‘BB’ Transparency International Sri Lanka (TISL) in a letter to President Mahinda Rajapaksa has urged him to revoke the special gazette notification issued under the Public Security Ordinance to empower the security forces to maintain law and order and transfer the same to the Police. As per the official announcement made by the Commissioner for Elections, a Presidential election will be held on 8 January 2015. According to the Sri Lankan Constitution, civil administration must be safeguarded during an election period in order to carry out a free and fair election, TISL Executive Director S. Ranugge pointed out in his letter. It also pointed out that all measures should be taken to strengthen the procedures and processes required to conduct the forthcoming elections freely and justly while affirming public peace and security island-wide. Even though emergency regulations are not in effect at the moment the President calls upon the military every month to maintain law and order in all administrative districts under the Public Security Ordinance. Certain administrative duties, which are generally performed by the Police are at times carried out by the military. However, the constant administration of the daily functions of the public can be a hindrance to the free movement of the people. Thereby, the TISL urges the President to cancel the gazette notice calling the military for civil administration during elections and to allow the Police to carry out such tasks. The TISL also pointed out that the Commissioner of Elections is entrusted with the power to call the military to oversee safety during the polls if required as per Constitutional provisions. ARMY SPOKESMAN'S ATTACK ON OPPOSITION MP MANGALA SAMARAWEERA: THE ARMY GETTING INVOLVED IN POLITICS Annex ‘BC’

232

Late last week we witnessed the scenario where the Army spokesman, a brigadier in rank, made the unusual claim that current UNP spokesman and former Rajapakse Administration Foreign Minister, MP Mangala Samaraweera had compromised national security by alleging at a press conference, that state intelligence agencies or at least some intelligence chiefs, were supporting the Bodu Bala Sena (BBS) and that the Aluthgama and Beruwela anti Muslim violence was in fact an organized operation with state intelligence backing. An update to that allegation or rather to the traction that it gathered, was that the Defense Secretary, in a media interview published on July 1st, felt compelled to deny any personal involvement in alleged defense establishment assistance and help to the BBS or other extremist groups. He offered to resign if the allegations were proved. Army Spokesman crosses a line Firstly the Army spokesman crossed an important line in a democratic system by directly taking on an opposition political leader. As a former presidential spokesman, I would contend, that the role of the Army spokesman is to inform the public what the Army may be doing, not comment on what others, especially civilian politicians are doing. The Army getting involved in politics is a really bad idea. Civilian oversight of the military is an important aspect of a democratic system of governance and if the defense establishment was aggrieved about any comments at an opposition press conference, the recourse was certainly not to directly take on the civilian democratic leader by a military officer in uniform. If the issue was political, then the rebuttal was up to the government. If the bone of contention was a security issue, based on the substance of the UNP spokesman’s claim, then the matter should have been referred to the Attorney General, for a determination as to a violation of any relevant law. Which according to press reports have now occurred, together with a complaint to the police. However, given that the issue has now been tried in the court of public opinion, with Mangala Samaraweera seemingly coming out on top, it is doubtful if a court of law can adjudicate fairly on the matter. The Army grievance does not seem so much to be with the allegation, as with the revelation of the identities of the intelligence chiefs. However in any democratic society, the identities of the senior most intelligence agency chiefs are public knowledge. The heads of the American CIA, the Indian RAW and the Pakistani ISI are known to one and all. In fact, the Americans have a very public US senate confirmation hearing for the appointment of CIA chief. Alleged Intelligence Chiefs assistance to the BBS The Defense Secretary has in a media interview published on 1st July, denied that he is involved with the BBS. What is public knowledge in that regard is of course that he was the chief guest at the opening of the BBS Galle office and that Minister Rauff Hakeem tried desperately through the President to get the Defense Secretary not to go. He went. However, in the Defense Secretaries defense being a chief guest does not a conspiracy make. Intelligence agencies as part of their core activities are often engaged in covert operations in support of their nation’s national security. For countries which assess their national security threats as being external, their intelligence agencies are active overseas, collecting information and thereby providing analysis for policy makers back home, but also engaging in covert operations.

233

Sadly in the case of Sri Lanka, for much of our post independence history, we have to our shame, defined our enemies and consequently experienced our national security threats as being internal and coming from within ourselves. In the 1970’s it was the first JVP insurrection, in the 1980’s it was the Tamil militant movement, in the late 1980’s it was back again the second JVP insurrection and thereafter we had a full blown civil war with the LTTE. Now five years after ending the war with the LTTE, we have opened up a new conflict, this time against the Muslims. Given this situation and that Sri Lanka is South Asia’s most militarized society, going by the ratio of security services to the population, when one includes in that number, in addition to the three services, the police, the STF, the auxiliaries and the civil defense force, it is hard to believe that state intelligence was either unaware or uninvolved in the new flash point and fault line in society, at least even in a benign way. Given the hate speech and vitriol spewed publicly by the hate groups, deemed incitory by all except for the police spokesman and the attorney general, going by the fact that no action is being taken against the BBS, despite a formal complaint by the Bar Association to the Attorney General. It is difficult to imagine that state intelligence was hands off the issue. Either way it was a colossal failure of security. The rather obvious question that arises in the minds of independent observers from Sri Lankan citizens locally, to the international community and indeed our mayhem in Aluthgama and Beruwela was carefully noted by the UNHRC in Geneva, is whether the failure of security was due to a lack of ability or a lack of will. Given that Sri Lanka is highly militarized, few doubt the ability of state security to enforce law and order. The suspicion, which opposition spokesman MP Mangala Samaraweera voiced out loud was, that it was a matter of the administration’s will. Allowing minority bashing burnishes its Sinhala Buddhist nationalist credentials and increases support ahead of national elections. It works. Buddhist nationalist elements which dissented from the Rajapakse Administration over the casinos was back to defend the government on the anti Muslim violence. In Colombo’s diplomatic cocktail circuit for the past many months, after the phenomenal rise of the BBS and the enabling environment in which they operate, the vehicles they travel in, the buildings and offices they use and the deference of the police towards them, has been that the BBS has covert state patronage. MP, Mangala Samaraweera was only stating publicly what many are stating privately and the opposition spokesman must be given the democratic space and opportunity to make his claim. Mangala may be faulted for many things, but a lack of courage is not one of them. Democracy and our future as a free society, demands that we defend his right to say it. MILITARY TO DIS-ENGAGE FROM THE CIVIL- ADMINISTRATION IN THE NORTH & EAST Annex ‘BD’

RESTORE CIVIL ADMINISTRATION IN ALL ASPECTS TO ENSURE DEMOCRACY

(http://www.peace-srilanka.org/tamil/index.php/2012-07-25-05-48-15/press-releases/385-restore-civil-administration-in-all-aspects-to-ensure-

democracy)

234

The three week leadership training for incoming batches of university students in army camps that is currently being implemented at short notice is being debated nationally and is building up into a major political issue. The government has justified this measure as a progressive one that will institute discipline and social etiquette in the students. In the past universities have been hotbeds of student agitation and even violence. On the other hand, opposition political parties, student organizations and parents have expressed their opposition to this measure and questioned the need for this orientation to be given by the army and to take place within army camps. They have also argued that the orientation course if deemed necessary could well be done outside the military camps.

The National Peace Council is concerned about the growing reliance of the government on the military to take up tasks that are essentially civilian in nature. In the Northern and Eastern provinces the military continues to play an important role in governance, despite the end of the war, and former military commanders have been appointed as governors with overriding powers over the civil administration. In the Vanni, the day to day matters which should to be dealt with by the civilian authorities often have to receive the final approval of the Civil Affairs Office of the military. The people who have been resettled could feel they are under military rule. In addition military officials are increasingly getting involved in livelihood and development activities bringing an additional layer that constrains the work of professional NGOs specializing in these areas of work.

In the South too there are also examples of creeping militarisation. These include the use of military personnel to supervise the demolition of low income housing in Colombo and for more benign purposes such as to decorate streets with Vesak pandals and sell vegetables to bring down the cost of living. Retired military officers are being appointed to diplomatic positions in preference to career diplomats. The military may be deployed in development work and to represent the country to justify the expenditure on them but other countries like Pakistan and Indonesia realized late that involving the military in civilian affairs would tempt the military to a desire for power which should be in the hands of the elected politicians. It is ironic that the government has justified the imprisonment and ongoing trial of the former Army Comander Sarath Fonseka in part on this basis.

While Sri Lankans have every reason to be grateful to the military for winning the war and ending terrorism, it is unwise to mix the military with governance if we wish to progress as a democratic society. What makes the military tick and what makes a society democratic and creative are quite different. The strict subordination of the military to civilian authority in democratic countries, and the separation of military and civilian roles is an outcome of a long and painful process of historical evolution. Failure to ensure this could ultimately lead to unwanted military rule nursed by a democratically elected government. NPC calls for the restoration of civilian authority in all aspects of governance and for the separation of civil and military roles in society so that democracy may be ensured.

Governing Council The National Peace Council is an independent and non partisan organisation that works towards a negotiated political solution to the ethnic conflict in Sri Lanka. It has a vision of a peaceful and prosperous Sri Lanka in which the freedom, human rights and democratic rights of all the communities are respected. The policy of the National Peace Council is determined by its Governing Council of 20 members who are drawn from diverse walks of life and belong to all the main ethnic and religious communities in the country. MILITARY TO DIS-ENGAGE FROM COMMERCIAL ACTIVITY THAT

235

ADVERSELY IMPACT ON CIVIL SOCIETY – DEPRIVING THEIR LIVELIHOOD Annex ‘BE’ Armed, dangerous and building their own empires

(http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=10746321)

Military forces across South Asia are flexing their commercial muscles to create ventures that rival private firms and threaten to militarise civil

society.

In Pakistan, Bangladesh, Indian and Sri Lanka defence chiefs have interests in everything from airlines to sugar factories, banks to bakeries, from

power plants to ports. Investments worth billions of dollars are controlled by a military elite that is eclipsing civilian bureaucracies and, in some

cases, corrupting the services.

Pakistan

In Pakistan the military controls state-owned armament factories and runs trusts which work like private corporations. Its interests are worth US$20

billion ($24 billion).

Serving officers head up highway construction projects and manage trucking operations. Aided by the Army Engineering Corps, the military's road

building conglomerate completed the precipitous Karakoram Highway in the 1980s, connecting Pakistan to military and nuclear ally China.

A communications group working with the Signals Corps wires up the country.

Possibly the most profitable operation is the Army's Logistics Cell, set up by Pakistan's former dictator General Mohammad Zia-ul-Haq in the late

1970s. The cell used trailer trucks to collect weapons such as assault rifles and Stinger missiles from the southern port city of Karachi from ships

chartered by America's Central Intelligence Agency to arm the Mujahideen fighting the Soviet occupation of Afghanistan.

Later these trucks and their plucky Pashtun drivers from Pakistan's restive North West Frontier region played a role in establishing the Taleban's

control over Afghanistan in the mid-1990s. The large fleet of trucks continued to supply the Taleban regime with weapons, fuel and food until it was

toppled by the US in 2001.

The Fauji or Soldier Foundation, the country's largest industrial conglomerate, is the jewel in the army's crown.

Headed by a three-star officer, it provides "womb to tomb" facilities for nearly nine million retired servicemen. The foundation offers resettlement

and re-employment schemes, a private airline, educational institutions, power plants, steel and cement factories and even consumer goods,

producing electronic items, sugar and breakfast cereals.

236

"A large part of the military's internal economy remains invisible," writes defence analyst Ayesha Siddiqa in Military Inc: Inside Pakistan's Military

Economy.

In her analysis she details hundreds of serving and retired Pakistani military personnel, mainly from the army, who operate the complex web of

lucrative financial institutions, infrastructure, transport, telecommunication and construction businesses.

It is often jocularly said that all countries have a military but Pakistan's military has a country, which it runs at tremendous profit.

Satish Kumar, who edits India's National Security Annual Review, said the Pakistan Army was a ruling oligarchy with substantial economic interests to

safeguard. And it was highly unlikely that it would ever relinquish this role in the foreseeable future as it has too much money to lose, he added.

SriLanka

Sri Lanka is South Asia's most militarised country with 8000 defence personnel for every one million citizens. After defeating the Tamil Tiger

guerrillas in May 2009, the country opted to involve its bloated military in a range of commercial activities.

Instead of downsizing its 300,000 strong defence forces after the bitter civil war ended, President Mahinda Rajapaksa's administration has

encouraged their involvement in selling vegetables, running travel agencies, hotels and highway restaurants and collecting garbage in the capital,

Colombo.

The army builds houses and, for last year's Cricket World Cup, erected one stadium and renovated another.

On the northern Jaffna peninsula the army has converted a mess into a 22-room luxury resort. The Sri Lankan Navy runs ferry services and tours for

whale-watchers.

Disturbingly, the island's Education Ministry plans on sending fresh graduates to military camps for three-week leadership courses where they will

be given instruction in English, leadership skills and social etiquette.

The authorities justify this by claiming that army camps are the only places where a large body of students can be accommodated but analysts warn

that it is a move fraught with "militarising the seat of Sri Lanka's higher education".

Analysts and NGOs question defence involvement in commercial ventures claiming it could lead to Rajapaksa's administration using the military to

perpetuate its rule as in time it would be too hard to separate from national economic activity.

Bangladesh

In Bangladesh the military's business empire is worth around US$500 million ($600 million). Assets include hotels, at least two five-star properties in

Dhaka and another being built in Chittagong.

237

The Dhaka Radisson hotel offers guests use of the nearby deluxe army golf course which is owned by Bangladesh's Army Welfare Trust (AWT). It was

built on dedicated military land giving it a commercial advantage in Dhaka's sky-rocketing real estate market.

The army owns the Trust Bank with around 40 branches nationwide. In 2007 the military-backed caretaker government granted it exclusive rights to

receive fees for passports.

The army's welfare trust has a group which cares for veterans and family members of servicemen. Over the years this group has expanded its

industrial and financial operations to include interests in the food industry such as icecream manufacturing-textiles, jute, garments, electronics, real

estate and travel.

Analysts in Dhaka maintain many defence-owned businesses were "virtually indistinguishable" from other commercial enterprises in the way they

operated but in recent years this aspect had impacted adversely on the Bangaldeshi military.

The inquiry into the country's worst mutiny, by the paramilitary Bangladesh Rifles (BDR) border guards in 2009, in which some 68 senior military

officials were shot dead, revealed the insurrection was partially fuelled by resentment over the corruption of army officers engaged in commercial

activities.

India

The Indian military is the largest in South Asia. Since independence in 1947 successive civilian governments fearful of Pakistani-style coups have

assiduously and determinedly denied defence chiefs commercial and business opportunities.

But the Indian Army still manages to run around 100 golf courses and clubs which recently were the focus of a corruption probe by the country's

auditor. The Comptroller and Auditor General (CAG) declared the army's 97 golf courses were "unauthorised" and were being "exploited" to earn

revenue.

In its report on the management of defence estates, the CAG declared the golf courses spread across 3200ha were not authorised and the army was

doing wrong in using government land to generate profits.

Large revenues were being earned without paying any rent for use of government assets. The revenue these courses generated was not credited to

the government account but presumably to regimental funds, the CAG declared.

While this can be dismissed as relatively tame compared to the business interests of neighbouring defence interests, there is an alarming rise in the

number of Indian military officers charged with corruption, many court-martialled for selling subsidised defence rations and liquor on the open

market at great profit.

238

"Standards and values have changed for the worse and the army is not impervious to the overall environment" retired Lieutenant General V.K.

Kapoor admitted.

Sri Lanka army opens travel wing

(http://www.bbc.co.uk/sinhala/news/story/2011/03/110314_army_travel_agency.shtml)

The Sri Lankan army has announced that it has opened a travel agency to help the general public buy air tickets and foreign package tours.

It is the latest sphere of civilian society in which the armed forces are adopting new roles, nearly two years after the military victory over the Tamil

Tiger separatists.

The army says its Commander had the idea for this new ticketing agency last year because of the many army officers going on overseas assignments.

But with the opening of its new office next to the Air Force headquarters, it has decided to open its services to the general public.

It offers air tickets and holiday package tours to Malaysia, Singapore, Thailand and China and a Buddhist pilgrimage to India and Nepal.

Air Travel Services (Pvt) Ltd offers special holiday packages to China, Singapore, Malaysia, Bangkok and specially organized pilgrimages to

Dambadiwa, India

The site advertises its “unparalleled customer support” and affordable prices.

Sri Lanka’s army, which has more than 200,000 personnel, is establishing a varied set of new interests.

In recent months it has started selling vegetables with the stated aim of bringing cheaper food to consumers.

It also runs a holiday resort and roadside shops in the north.

The navy now conducts whale- and dolphin-watching trips for tourists, while the defence ministry is in charge of the country’s Urban Development

Authority.

One Sri Lankan commentator, Darini Rajasingham Senanayake, recently remarked that there were too many military businesses in Sri Lanka and said

the military was growing increasingly akin to its Pakistani counterpart, helped by state subsidy.

However the Sri Lankan military clearly feels it can get certain things done more efficiently than the civilian sector.

239

SRI LANKA ARMY TO RETURN MORE GOLD JEWELLERY TO NORTHERN OWNERS Annex ‘BF’ Commander of the Army, Lieutenant General Daya Ratnayake on Wednesday (26) at the Media Centre of the Ministry of Defence and Urban Development, announcing the release of another stock of gold jewelleries to 1960 more identified rightful owners in the North at a ceremony on December 4, headed by President Mahinda Rajapaksa. Lieutenant General Daya Ratnayake spelt out the painstaking efforts and the time-consuming verification process that had been undertaken by the Army for accelerated return of those stocks on a special directive of the President. The media briefing was further told that another total of remaining 419 owners of those recovered jewelleries, is yet to be traced for return as early as possible after making every effort in that direction, in close coordination with officials of state agencies, IDP centres, resettled villages, foreign destinations, etc since those stocks of gold jewelleries, had been recovered largely from the so-called ‘Tamil Eelam Banks’ and ‘Eelam Pawning Centres’ that were operating at the time of humanitarian operations before May 2009. The latest 1960 identified owners from Mannar (223), Vavuniya (319), Jaffna (45), Kilinochchi (1187) and Mullaittivu (186) will accordingly, arrive at Temple Trees in Colombo on December 4, to receive their jewelleries back from the President, following coordination of the Army, Lieutenant General Daya Ratnayake said. In Kilinochchi on 12 October 2014, President Rajapaksa symbolically returning recovered jewelleries to 25 recipients inaugurated the handover of gold jewelleries to 2377 legitimate owners in the Northern Province under the first phase, although some of those owners, were found having already obtained the money value for those jewelleries from the LTTE as evidenced in respective receipts, produced to the Army by the victims. “All those recoveries were duly documented, properly catalogued and detained for safekeeping by the Army at first, and the most challenging mechanism for identification of the owners, was put in place a few years ago after implementing various measures, meant to identify the exact owners. Some receipts or documents thus produced by claimants were beyond verification or identification while some had only just a bit of the first name or the surname, mentioned. In some cases, a piece of hand written or illegible paper was the only evidence, and with all that legitimacy of the return of those valuable jewelleries of high sentimental value to Tamil civilians, needed and had to be cross-checked and properly ascertained at village level state officials and other sources which itself was a daunting task to the Security Forces”, the Commander said. As recent as last October, north-based Security Forces through their Civil Coordinating Offices in the Wanni, Kilinochchi, Mullaittivu, Mannar and Jaffna appealed the public who have still failed to claim their gold valuables which had been deposited with the LTTE, to reach those offices and process their ownership claims, proving their bona fides.

240

In order to expedite the process for return of remaining jewelleries under safe-keeping, owners who still possess any LTTE issued pieces of evidence or acceptable or supportive documents to that effect, are encouraged to report to the nearest Civil Coordinating Offices in the north and place their claims for necessary onward process of identification, the Commander added. Likewise, the Security Forces in the event legitimate claimants could not be traced, expect to hand over those remaining jewelleries to the Central Bank of Sri Lanka in accordance with State regulations and provisions, the Commander concluded. Military Spokesman, Navy and Air Force Spokesmen and Director Media at Army Headquarters were present at the occasion OVER 7,500 EX-TIGERS NOW EMPLOYED Annex ‘BG’ Over 7,500 rehabilitated ex-Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE) cadres are employed in various capacities, in Sri Lanka and abroad, M.A Isadeen of the Bureau of the Commissioner General of Rehabilitation said. He added that 12,018 ex-LTTE cadres have been rehabilitated and reunited with their families. Six-hundred-and-sixty-six rehabilitated LTTE cadres have been integrated into the Civil Defence Department. Some cadres, who were working as government employees before being recruited by the LTTE, will be able to rejoin the government service. Meanwhile, 132 LTTE cadres who sat for this year's GCE A/L examination had qualified for university entrance. Only 81 ex-cadres are left to be rehabilitated, he said. OVER 18,000 ACRES OF NORTHERN LAND RETURNED Annex ‘BH’ Since the end of conflict in May 2009 the security forces have returned over about 18,000 acres of land back to their owners in the North. These lands were returned in stages within the past five years, said Media Centre Director/Spokesman Brigadier Ruwan Wanigasooriya during the weekly press briefing held yesterday (6 June). Since 2009 18,044 acres of land in Jaffna have been released to the civilians. In 2009, 4379 acres were released while 6452 acres, 5817 acres, 785 acres and 410 acres were released to the civilians in 2010, 2011, 2012 and 2013 respectively. So far 201 acres of land have been handed back to civil owners this year alone. While steps are being taken to remove the camp at Nunawil in Chavakatcheri within the next couple of months the one at Atchuweli will not be removed he further clarified. The land thus released will be handed over to the original owners. He also said that the former LTTE camp, ‘Dikkam’ in the coast of Point Pedro will not be handed back.

241

The security forces do not in any instance occupy private land by force in any part of the country, and it does not unnecessarily hold any land or set up camps. Camps are established or removed only based on national security concerns and requirements. Decisions on such issues are not made on an ad hoc manner but are taken only after detailed study and discussion, Brigadier added. Hence it was observed that the camp at Nunawil is no further required and decision was made to remove it three months ago. The personnel in that camp will occupy new facilities presently being built at another camp. Security in the Atchuweli area remains to be continued and the presence of a security forces camp is required in this area he further said. Commenting on the Dikkam camp he said, the land on which this former Sea Tiger base was built does not belong to private individuals but is a crown land. SRI LANKA ARMY SAYS RETURNED 19,500 ACRES OF LAND IN JAFFNA TO CIVILIANS : Sri Lanka Army says that it has gradually returned a large extent of land to the original owners after reducing the size of army camps in Jaffna. Military Spokesman and Ministry of Defence, Media Center Director Brigadier Ruwan Wanigasooriya said the land occupied by the Army now has been reduced to 6,500 acres from the original 26,000 acres. He said nearly 20,000 acres of land has been returned to the owners after dismantling around 200 military camps. The Spokesman noted that most of the returned land was earlier occupied by the LTTE for their military purposes after taking them over from the people by force. However, he said it is necessary for the military to continue to maintain army camps in certain selected areas in the Jaffna Peninsula for national security as security is a matter that cannot be neglected. Rejecting the reports that say the government is taking over the land to set up a new camp in Atchchuvely, the Spokesman said the Atchchuvely camp was in operation since 1995 and it is one of camps that the military has decided to retain in the peninsula. He explained that the part of the land where the Atchchuvely camp is located is owned by the state while the rest of it is owned by nine individuals and none of them are displaced persons. The Spokesman said the government is prepared to provide compensation to the owners.

242

The owners had earlier agreed to receive compensation but due to political pressure from Tamil politicians the public has held a protest recently when Army officers went to survey the land, Brigadier Wanigasooriya said. Speaking of a similar incident happened in Mirusuvil, where the Sri Lanka Army 52nd Division Headquarters was situated, the Spokesman said there also the owner changed her mind about receiving compensation from the government for her land after political pressure. He pointed out that those lands were earlier occupied by the LTTE by force and without any payments to the owners, "However, as a state military force the Army had taken measures to provide compensation to the owner of the land and acquire the land complying with legal requirements," Brigadier Wanigasooriya said. UN SPECIAL RAPPORTEUR ON HUMAN RIGHTS TO VISIT SRI LANKA Annex ‘BJ’ The United Nations Special Rapporteur on the human rights of migrants, François Crépeau, will visit Sri Lanka from 19 to 26 May 2014 to assess the

human rights situation of Sri Lankans migrating abroad for work, and the related recruitment practices. "Migration plays a key role in the economic

development of Sri Lanka. Foreign workers from 24% of the labour force, and remittances from 33% of the country's foreign... ...exchange and 8.3%

of its GDP," Crépeau said.However, the human rights expert noted that many migrants reportedly experience abuse and exploitation, which often

begins already during the recruitment process. "This visit represents a unique opportunity to assess their situation on the ground," he said. This is

the first mission to Sri Lanka by an independent expert charged by the UN Human Rights Council with monitoring and reporting on the human rights

situation of migrants around the world.During his eight-day mission to the country, Crépeau will meet a range of government officials responsible

for migration and labour, international organizations, civil society, the private sector and both prospective and returned migrants, to discuss how to

better protect the human rights of migrants, including in the recruitment process.The Special Rapporteur will present a comprehensive report of

the visit to the United Nations Human Rights Council in June 2015.

GOSL NAMES AND BANS LTTE FRONTS : NEDIYAVAN Annex ‘BK’

243

GOSL has officially declared 16 organizations operating overseas as LTTE fronts and named over 400 individuals for their support of LTTE terror. The list gazetted in April 2014 declares the leaders of the 4 key factions. Father Emmanuel head of Global Tamil Forum, Rudrakumaran of US based TGTE, Vinyagam based in Brussels and Nediyavan operating from Norway. The last group is the most dangerous and is attempting to oust others by placing their own as heads of the other groups. The hold that the faction has over funds is noteworthy and requires the GOSL to use every diplomatic means to seek the arrest of Nediyavan and extradition to Sri Lanka to be charged for criminal and terror acts. Perinbananayakam Sivaparan / Nediyavan

• Born: 28 August 1976, Vaddukoddai • Schooling: Jaffna Hindu College, Kittu Political College • Joined LTTE: 1994 • Based : Norway • Offices in Europe, Canada, Australia, New Zealand and India (Tamil Nadu) • Role: International Coordinator of International Secretariat of the LTTE and managed LTTE fronts and LTTE branches

worldwide, directed political and economic activity and limited procurement, demonstrations

• Nediyavan reported to Castro (Veerakulasingham Manivannan) at the International Coordinating Centre (now dead) • Nediyavan faction operates through the offices of the Tamil Coordinating Committee (TCC) • Maried: 30 Oct 2005 in Wanni to Sivagowri Shanthamohan a niece of LTTE leader Lala Ranjan of Koyathotan, Jaffna. Lala Ranjan

was a founder member of LTTE and trained in India and died in 1984.

• Nediyavan Faction is also known as the Tamil Eelam Peoples Alliance (TEPA). Nediyavan is accused of

• Carrying out demonstrations using LTTE flags • Authorizing attacks against Sri Lankan diplomatic missions in Oslo • Authorizing attacks against Sinhalese communities overseas • Keeping tab on foreign nationals of Tamil ethnicity (In 2000, Rajasingham Jayadevan, UK citizen and trustee of a London kovil

was detained in Vanni for 2 months demanding the kovil be given to LTTE)

• Coerced foreign nationals of Tamil ethnicity to contribute funds or face punishment. • A member of LTTE delegation 30 Oct 2002, 28 July 2004, 10 March 2005 and 8 Nov 2005. • Included in the 14 member LTTE delegation which visited EU countries from 29 Sept – 2 Nov 2004. During this period he

headed recruitment to Tamil Youth Organization – where training was first given in Vanni and then members were sent back to Europe on foreign passports.

• Funded an air ticket of American Congressman Danny Davis to Sri Lanka 2005.

244

• LTTE`s propaganda website Tamilnet operated from Norway is said to be controlled by Nediyavan group while Sreetharan operates it from Bethesda, Maryland, USA.

• LTTE`s ideologue, the Late Anton Balasingam`s helper Jeyachandran well known as Jeya has taken control of the website Arrests/Questioning/Acts of violence

18 Involved in using Tamil gangs against ordinary Tamils and former LTTE supports across Europe. – clash between Nediyavan faction and rival reported at Kovil festival in Oslo 7 August 2010

19 Dutch government questions Nediyavan after requesting Norway police to arrest Nediyavan in 2011. The Dutch launched an investigation on the LTTE codenamed Operation Koninck” and have found the money trail to Norway. LTTE members have revealed that money raised by tigers in Netherlands is sent to Nediyavan in Norway

20 In March 2014, the Sri Lankan defense with the cooperation of Iranian and Malaysian authorities accomplished renditioning of a LTTE leader Subramaniam Kapilan alias Nanthagopan. He and Aravindhan (Irumporai) are 2 deputy leaders of the Nediyavan group. Nandagopan operates from South East Asia (though wife and 4 children live in Germany) while Irumporai operates from Europe (and holds a New Zealand passport and is based in German). Nanthagopan was registered as a ‘refugee’ under UN HCR Thailand.

Clashes within overseas LTTE

Differences between TGTE led Nediyavan to form ‘democratic PTGT’ against Rudrakumaran (Provincial Trannational Government of Tamil Eelam) breaking TGTE vote base.

Nediyavan had tried to kidnap an Australian citizen in Oslo, who was running a global TV station known as GTV. Nediyavan had met him in Oslo and asked him to hand in millions of dollars turnover made by GTV and in addition to property he owned in Australia.

Camouflaging the LTTE

LTTE’s ‘Voice of Tigers’ was changed into ‘Voice of Tamil’ but with the same logo by LTTE Nediyavan established the International Council of Eelam Tamils (ICET) of which members were:

National Council of Canadian Tamils – Canadian branch of Nediyavan faction/TEPA. NCCT President is Ranjan Sri Ranjan who has been lobbying in Geneva against Sri Lanka. He was also President of Canadian Tamil Congress.

Swiss Council of Eelam Tamils Norwegian Council of Eelam Tamils Maison du Tamil Eelam, France Country Council of Eelam Tamils, Germany Italy Council of Eelam Tamils

245

Dutch Tamil Forum Danish Tamils Forum Tamil Cultural Organisation – Belgium British Tamils Forum Tamil Youth Organisation – New Zealand

The connections Nediyavan Faction is represented in Canada by NCCT whose President Ranjan Sri Ranjan was also President of Canadian Tamil

Congress M K Sivajilingam, TNA MP is a relative of Prabakaran Krishna Saravanamuttu of NCCT is also the spokesperson for ICET, International Council of Eelam Tamils established by

Nediyavan Nediyavan Faction works closely with US Tamil Political Action Council Nediyavan faction also works with lankai Tamil Sangam (US based) and Tamils Against Genocide (TAG) to pursue criminal and

civil litigation against Sri Lankan officials.

GTV Nediyavan had met him in Oslo and asked him to hand in millions of dollars turnover made by GTV and in addition to property he owned in Australia.

Nediyavan has started a new television channel on 3 July 2010 ‘Tamil 24th’ through Belgium satellite services. LTTE`s head of fund raising in the UK Rupert Soosaipillai known as Thanam has taken control of the Spectrum medium wave and have named it `Tamil 24` with help of the founder of the IBC radio Thasicious Master for the Nediyavan faction.

Unusual : Banned but Around

Tamil Student Associations (TSAs) in over eight University campuses in Canada commemorated Heroes Day (LTTE terrorists who died in combat). James Clark from the Canadian Peace Alliance (of which Krishna Saravanamuttu is in the steering committee) said at the event at York last Monday: “Maaveerar Naal is an occasion not only to remember and pay tribute to the martyrs and heroes of Tamil Eelam, but also to reflect on the lessons of the struggle for peace and justice.” (Did James Clark actually mean this or was he reading off a prepared script?)

NCCT and USTPAC organized a protest in front of the UN Consulate in New York in September 2010 against Sri Lanka. It is important to note that the Global Tamil Forum which claims to be the umbrella of pro-LTTE Tamil Diaspora groups overseas is in reality steered by the Nediyavan Faction which also steers the British Tamil Forum. It is Nediyavan and not Father Emmanuel who is the brains behind foreign LTTE operations. However, it is not even Nediyavan who is the real brains. The pro-LTTE groups are steered by another lot of people chief among them is Jeyachandran Gopinath (Jeya Annai) who resides in Norway. He is the founder of LTTE’s official Norwegian paper strop, founder of TAMILNET, founder of NCET, Head of non-Tamil media for LTTE’s NEDIYAVAN wing, Head of LTTE’s election committee, former head of TCC in Oslo.

246

What is also noteworthy is that all is not honky dory within LTTE support-bases. We do not know whether it is because of the LTTE kitty or because each of the leaders are vying to become the supreme leader now that Prabakaran is dead, but we do know that there are frictions and these frictions are excellent examples to show what a façade the Tamil ‘Eelam’ cause is. We now need to wonder statistically how Tamils are divided. How many Tamils align to Rudrakumaran and his TGTE? How many Tamils align to Catholic clergy Emmanuel and his Global Tamil Forum? How many Tamils are with Nediyavan and his TEPA? Then we have the sub-groups who also play politics – British Tamil Forum is pro-Nediyavan. What the GOSL must immediately do is to set up a mode of confidential and anonymous communication where harassed, tortured and aggrieved Tamils as a result of Nediyavan faction intimidation can log their details. These details can in turn be investigated and be sufficient enough for the respective EU governments to take action given that Nediyavan and group are now banned under UNSecurity Council Resolution 1373. UN: SRI LANKA SHOULD PROTECT MIGRANTS FROM ABUSE Annex ‘BL’ With nearly 2 million of its citizens working abroad and their remittances providing the island’s largest single source of foreign exchange, the protection of Sri Lankan migrants is an urgent issue, according to the U.N.. Abuse of workers abroad and reports about the mistreatment of migrants captured by Australian authorities at sea mean there is a spotlight on the Sri Lankan government’s new “action plan” for dealing with returning and reintegrating migrants. The U.N. Special Rapporteur on Human Rights of Migrants, Francois Crepeau, told Anadolu Agency that Sri Lanka needs to take specific measures to better protect people on the move; from labourers in dour conditions abroad to Sri Lankans who flee the country in desperation. Crepeau said there are serious concerns about the physical and work safety issues faced by Sri Lankan migrant workers, the socio-economic conditions that drive, in particular, ethnic minority Tamils to risk treacherous sea journeys and the island’s response to migrants. “Issues of safety, abuse, exploitation and harassment continue to plague Sri Lankan migrant workers. As a country reliant on export of labour, authorities should urgently address them,” he said.

247

Money sent home by migrant workers provides income for nearly a third of Sri Lanka’s population while also remaining the island’s main source of foreign exchange, with remittances of more than $6 billion sent to Sri Lanka in 2013. Crepau highlighted that Sri Lanka needs to examine more closely the deaths of workers abroad. In 2013 there were 298 migrant worker deaths, an increase of almost 4 percent from 2012. The value of insurance paid to the families of victims totalled totalled only 130,515,977 Sri Lanka rupees ($1 million). “There had been reports of mutilated bodies being returned to Sri Lanka, at times, with missing organs. Autopsies are not performed in Sri Lanka and the families are often not allowed to see these bodies,” noted Crepau. Protecting women The vast majority of Sri Lankans working abroad are women employed as domestic workers in Gulf States such as Saudi Arabia, Qatar, the United Arab Emirates and Kuwait. The trend has however reversed since 2012 because of several local policy decisions. Since January 2014, Sri Lanka has been insisting on a family background report from women and does not recommend those with children under five years of age for migrant work, which Crepeau, in a report to the government, described as a “discriminatory practice” which denies women opportunities. “Women migrants often work in private households, making them particularly vulnerable to abuse and exploitation. Domestic work is excluded from most of the labour laws in many countries, including in Sri Lanka,” said Crepau. “Sri Lanka should extend labour protection to domestic workers, ratify the relevant ILO Convention 189 on Decent Work for Domestic Workers and learn from good practices like those in other countries,” he said. The plight of domestic workers was illustrated most graphically by the beheading of Rizana Nafeek, an under-aged and untrained domestic worker from eastern Sri Lanka, who allegedly smothered an infant to death but claimed that the baby choked while feeding on a milk bottle. Bilateral agreements Protecting Sri Lankans abroad is no easy task. In the past, there had been recorded instances of serious rights violations including torture, abuse, assault and even sexual assaults, in addition to exploitative labor practices such as the substitution of contracts to reduce wage and alter job descriptions. The island’s labor-regulating agency, the Sri Lanka Bureau of Foreign Employment acknowledges that despite measures to ensure safe migration many of these issues persist.

248

“We are trying to further reduce these concerns. We hope to enter bilateral agreements with labor-receiving countries to ensure workers’ rights better,” said Indrani Pathinayake, a training and recruitment manager at the labor agency. Sri Lanka only has a single such agreement at present, with Saudia Arabia, which guarantees the internationally-accepted rights often denied to domestic workers. Crepeau promotes the negotiation and effetive implementation of similar agreements with other states, in line with international human rights instruments. Meanwhile, Sri Lanka has begun strengthening its own legal framework. The Sri Lankan government has made training compulsory for all migrant workers and for the domestic sector, where the employees are 95 percent female, there is a set standard for vocational skills and language competency. A National Policy on Reintegration of Migrant Returnees and a National Acton Plan are expected to be introduced soon, to address the socio-economic and psychological reintegration of migrant returnees. Post-war migration A major cause of migration has been the slow post-war reconciliation in Sri Lanka’s north and east, after decades of civil war ended in 2009. There has been a sharp increase in ethnic Tamils fleeing the island by boat, mostly to Australia, because of racial discrimination, a dearth of employment opportunities and a sense of hopelessness among young Tamil men in particular. “Information is now available, indicating that Tamils experience a particular need to migrate, often without documents, due to poor employment opportunities in Sri Lanka and discrimination,” said Crepau. “The Sri Lankan government should take effective measures to ensure equal work opportunities for all Sri Lankans, making migration a choice, not a necessity.” Some of those who have travelled to Australia have found themselves handed back to the Sri Lankan navy and, on their return, treated as criminals. “Some Sri Lankans try to migrate irregularly to Australia on boats, often facilitated by smugglers. Attempting to migrate irregularly is a criminal offence in Sri Lanka. I urge the Government to decriminalize irregular migration as it should only be considered an administrative offence,” said Crepau. Concerns about migrants are not limited to Sri Lanka, especially in South Asia where Nepal, India and Bangladesh have all called for greater protection of their citizens working abroad. The issue was brought up at a meeting of South Asian leaders in November 2014 in Nepal, where they agreed to collaborate on managing migration and ensuring the safety, security and well-being of migrant workers.

249