Archive for December, 2010

December 31, 2010

Sri Lanka: Media access denied to cover selected hearings of the LLRC at a detention camp

by sd

NfR Sri Lanka

Press release/ 31 December  2010

Information reaching NfR from Sri Lanka shows that the reason behind the last minute blocking of access to media  at the hearings of the Lessons Learnt and Reconciliation Commission (LLRC) took place at  the  infamous  Boosa detention camp on 30th December 2010,  was to  prevent the media  access to the   hearings of selected witnesses who were to give evidence on that day.  NfR re-iterates its concern that censorship in any form will discredit the  proceedings of the LLRC  and  negate the  achievement of its  objectives.

This again shows that the government does not wish  to provide  unrestricted media accesses to any reconciliation and accountability process. That is  vital in order to  bring out the voices heard and unheard by  such initiatives and monitor the responses. The people have been denied the right to information on what transpired during the proceedings of the LLRC in Boosa.

Unspecified number of Tamil detainees are kept in the Boosa detention camp. There has been a number of  allegations of torture and inhuman treatments of detainees in this camp. NfR feels strongly  that all those detainees who wanted to give evidence at the LLRC should have been given a chance to place their grievances before  it.  Media has a right to monitor and report on the evidence they place  unless the persons concerned had preferred to give evidence in camera.
According to Centre for Human Rights, a  human rights organization in Colombo,  journalists from the BBC, LAKBIMANEWS, Thinakural, Veerakesari, Reuters and Tamil Mirror had arrived at Boosa Detention Centre  that morning  having obtained permission from the Media Centre for National Security (MCNS).  After waiting for nearly three hours these journalists had been told that they need approval from the Defence Ministry to cover  the proceeding.  Consequently  they had return to Colombo  disappointed.

The LLRC blocked international media from covering their proceedings  in two previous occasions and  on both those  occasions hearings took place in the war affected Northern Province.  On both those occasions it appears that  evidence  had immerged on abductions and killings of unarmed Tamils.  On an another occasion a para-military group working with the government had threatened journalists who had gone to  cover the proceedings.

Genuine reconciliation needs  an open  and transparent   process. Closing the door to Media and denying opportunities to persons who want to be heard,  will only exacerbate  the situation making reconciliation and peaceful co-existence  of the various communities in Sri Lanka more and  more difficult.

Steering Committee
NfR Sri Lanka

December 31, 2010

Less anti-media violence in 2010 but more obstruction and self-censorship

by sd

RSF

Published on 30 December 2010.

Reporters Without Borders condemns the new forms of censorship and obstruction being used by government to prevent diverse and freely-reported media coverage of the situation in Sri Lanka. The fall in the number of physical attacks, threats and cases of imprisonment is to be welcomed, but it is worrying that the authorities are blocking the return of real editorial freedom.

At the same time, the flight of at least 55 Sri Lankan journalists, including many press freedom activists, into exile during the past three years has left a void in the country’s media.

We hope the authorities will create the conditions for a lasting improvement in press freedom in 2011. This must include solving the murder of The Sunday Leader’s well-known editor, Lasantha Wickrematunge, nearly two years ago (http://en.rsf.org/sri-lanka-shock-a…) and political cartoonist Prageeth Ekneligoda’s disappearance nearly a year ago (http://en.rsf.org/sri-lanka-where-i…).

The latest incident was today’s ban on a visit by 10 Sri Lankan and foreign journalists, including the BBC’s correspondent, to a detention camp in Boosa to attend a meeting between prisoners and the government-created Lessons Learned and Reconciliation Commission (LLRC). The reporters had previously received permission from the LLRC and the Media Centre for National Security.

Human rights groups say there have been cases of torture and extrajudicial disappearances in the camp, which houses more than 700 suspected former members of the Tamil Tiger rebels.

BBC journalists were already prevented from attended several LLRC interview sessions with the Tamil population in September in Killinochchi, Mullaitivu and elsewhere. The BBC’s journalists were, on the other hand, able to cover the commission’s work in the north of the island in August. At this time, the Tamil daily Thinakural and the Colombo-based English-language Sunday Times published devastating accounts of cases of forced disappearances of Tamils at the end of the civil war.

As a general rule, the authorities are providing the media with no precise information about the problem of Tamil Tiger prisoners of war. The figures vary from ministry to ministry. And the press has had no access to some detainee camps. Journalists are afraid to cover the issue of war crimes or their editors do not let them.

A Colombo-based media freedom activist said: “Several journalists from English and Sinhalese-language media have been allowed to follow the LLRC’s work, but their reports do not include the most disturbing accounts of the end of the war. They have to censor themselves on the issue of war crimes.”

In another example of self-censorship, few Sri Lankan media reported the recent murder in Jaffna of an education official who had criticised the government’s decision to force Tamil children to sing the national anthem in Sinhalese.

One of the few newspapers to cover these stories, The Sunday Leader, is being subjected to various forms of harassment. Its editor, Frederica Jansz, is currently being sued by Gotabhaya Rajapaksa, one of the president’s brothers.

In 2010, the main telephone operator, Dialog, refused to transmit critical content of the government by SMS. A Colombo-based journalist said this decision forced several news websites to censor themselves in order to continue having their reports relayed by Dialog. The situation was denounced by JNW News, which provides mobile phone operators with news content.

Cases of violence have not ended altogether. Reporters for the MTV / Sirasa television station and the Lanka-e-News website were recently attacked by ruling party supporters while at Colombo airport to cover the return of the leader of the far-left NSSP party. And four journalists, including a Daily Mirror photographer, were hit by police while covering a student demonstration in the capital in mid-October.

December 30, 2010

Can reconciliation be achieved through a veil of secrecy?

by sd

Lessons Learnt and Reconciliation Commission (LLRC)

Centre for Human rights (CHR) strongly criticizes preventing journalists from covering the LLRC session in the Boossa Detention Centre today (December, 30, 2010.) the LLRC was to meet around 100 hardcore LTTE cadres detained in the camp.

The LLRC has the ultimate responsibility to make their actions transparent and accountable. It is widely accepted that openness of the process and the accessibility to information is important in achieving reconciliation since it clears away misunderstandings and prejudices. Therefore CHR feels that preventing independent journalists covering LLRC sessions and dousing the voice of a segment of the stakeholders is counter-productive in achieving the professed goal of reconciliation.

It is evident that transparency and accessibility is vital in bridging the gap which has been created between communities during the 30 year old civil war. And as a powerful commission appointed by the President it has the power and ability to assure transparency and accessibility.

Hundreds of suspected LLTE cadres are detained in the Boossa Detention Centre. During the LLRC sessions in Jaffna and Trincomalee it was clear that addressing the issue of detainees is vital in achieving reconciliation. We believe that the session in Boossa was one of the most pivotal and the most sensitive LLRC sitting because the Commission will have the chance to meet a group of young men who have believed in an army struggle, listen to what they have learnt and what they suggest to achieve reconciliation.

Journalists from the BBC, LAKBIMAnEWS, Thinakural, Weerakesari, Reuters and Tamil Mirror arrived at Boossa Detention Centre with the approval of Media Centre for National security (MCNS) Director Lakshman Hulugalle. MCNS Director had assured several journalists on December, 29 that they will be allowed to cover the session however at the last minuet the journalists were informed they cannot enter the Centre without Ministry of Defense (MoD) clearance. After waiting for nearly three hours and numerous phone calls to Hulugalle, LLRC Secretary and the TID the journalists returned to Colombo. For the first time a LLRC session was closed to media and in a few days various rumours on what transpired will start circulating.

CHR would reiterate that transparency and accessibility are pivotal in achieving reconciliation and that the LLRC is responsible for ensuring that. We hope that this would be the last time that the doors of the LLRC would be closed to the media.

Rajitha Keerthi Tennakoon

Executive Director/CHR

December 30, 2010

SRI LANKA: A whistle-blower who exposed the leakage of a question paper at Sri Lanka Law College forced into hiding

by sd

The student who knew the question gave details of the paper which could not have just been guessed. Having learned about the leakage of the paper, Thushara Jayarathne informed the invigilator for the exam and the principle of the law college. He expected that the invigilator and the law college authorities would immediately remove this paper from the exam and would not proceed with the exam for that paper. However, no such action was taken and no attempt was made to take any actions on the basis of his complaint.

He later went to the Koswatha Police to record a complaint and this complaint was also rejected. When he made an attempt to record a complaint at the Commission against Bribery and Corruption, his request was once again turned down. One of the officers explained to him in Sinhalese that it is the law of nature for big animals to eat the small ones, and that if he does not learn to live with this understanding, he may find it difficult to survive.

The student managed to record his complaint at the police headquarters. He has also complained by way of an affidavit to the Chief Justice of Sri Lanka and to the Registrar of the Supreme Court. However, no action has been taken to initiate any inquiry into the leakage of the paper or to declare the particular paper invalid.

Instead of inquiries, the student himself was brought under severe pressure when the Registrar of the law college made threatening calls, asking him to withdraw the complaint. He also received many threats from many quarters and, for his own security, he had to keep away from sitting for two subsequent papers. He now lives in hiding for fear of his own life.

It is believed that a powerful person’s son is sitting for this exam and that this why there is reluctance on the part of the law college authorities and all other authorities to intervene into this issue.

The Asian Human Rights Commission calls on the Sri Lankan government and also the Inspector General of Police to provide security for Thushara Jayarathne, the law student who has made the complaint relating to the leaking of an exam paper at the law college. The Asian Human Rights Commission is fully aware of Sri Lanka’s record of causing of forced disappearances and therefore is particularly concerned about the security of this student.

The law college is a premier institution for the training of lawyers in Sri Lanka. In recent times, the reputation of the college has begun to degenerate with widespread rumors and allegations of corruption at various levels, including at the stage of admission of students into the college. That the institution that trains lawyers is facing this situation is an indication of the widespread lawlessness that has spread into the judicial system itself, due to the phenomena that is called politicization.

In essence, politicization means the control of all aspects of society and life by the direct influence of the executive presidential system. The idea of independence of institutions has been rapidly lost. The Executive President is above the law and not answerable in any manner to any court. The Asian Human Rights Commission has constantly pointed out that the supremacy of law has been undermined in Sri Lanka and that the authority of the judiciary itself has been reduced to a very marginal position.

This incident about the leakage of a question paper is only the tip of an iceberg. The larger tragedy is the rule of law system itself.

What will be the role of lawyers who pass exams in this manner? Will they enter the legal profession with any sense of respect for the basic norms of rule of law? Would it be a surprise if young lawyers who pass in this manner would exploit all possibilities of corruption within the legal profession? Some of them also enter the judicial positions.

The trustees and authorities of the law college bear the responsibility to investigate into this incident as well as the general criticisms about the corruption of their institution. Many of them may plead that the power balance in the country has so shifted that they are unable to exercise the kind of authority that is required for the running of an institution with required norms and standards. However, this should be no excuse for their culpability. If the situation has so degenerated, then it is their duty to declare it so and to resign in protest. So long as they silently participate in this process, they too are guilty of destroying the very foundations of the rule of law and the legal profession itself.

###

About AHRC: The Asian Human Rights Commission is a regional non-governmental organisation monitoring and lobbying human rights issues in Asia. The Hong Kong-based group was founded in 1984.

http://www.ahrchk.net/statements/mainfile.php/2010statements/3013/

December 30, 2010

Journalists banned from reporting war commission

by sd

2010-12-30
Ten international and Sri Lankan journalists including BBC correspondents were refused access to the Boosa detention camp this morning where the Lessons Learnt and Reconciliation Commission (LLRC) met with detainees.

The journalists had visited the camp on the invitation of the LLRC and had received permission from the head of the Media Center for National Security, Lakshman Hulugalle who had permitted the visit.
However when the journalist arrived at the camp they were denied access by security personnel. At the camp
when the journalists contacted LLRC Secretary, S.B Athugoda, he said that the journalists needed MOD ( Ministry of Defence) clearance. A Daily Mirror journalist who visited the camp said that a TID official said that the journalists should have received permission from the DIG of the TID or the IGP. However the journalists did not receive access.

The military-run Boosa prison contains 700 Tamil Tiger suspects described by the government as hard-core. Human Rights Watch and other human rights groups allege that prisoners have disappeared from the facility and there have also been reports of torture there.

Government of Sri Lanka early December extended an invitation to an advisory panel on Sri Lanka appointed by the UN secretary general to visit the island, reversing its earlier refusal to grant them visas.

Many organisations including the International Crisis Group (ICG), Human Rights Watch (HRW), and Amnesty International (AI) which call for an independent and impartial enquiry to establish what happened during the final stages of war in Sri Lanka, have all refused invitations to take part in the proceedings of LLRC.

They argue that the commission is flawed because its members were appointed by the government, has no real mandate to investigate war crimes in the last stages of the conflict, lacks any mechanism to protect witness and falls short of minimum international standards of a commission of inquiry.

Sri Lankan President Mahinda Rajapaksa appointed the eight member LLRC to “report on the lessons to be learnt from the events in the period, Feb 2002 to May 2009″.

http://www.lankanewsweb.com/news/EN_2010_12_30_009.html

December 30, 2010

Sri Lanka denies NfR allegation on the killing of Jaffna Education Director

by sd

Thursday, 30 December 2010

Our attention is drawn to a statement by Networking for Rights (NfR – Sri Lanka) on 28.12.2010 titled “Sri Lanka: Director Education in Jaffna shot dead for speaking out”

The allegations in this statement which refers to the killing by unknown persons of the Deputy Director of Education, Valikamam zone of the Jaffna district, are wholly false.

The statement alleges that the killing of Mr. Markandu Sivalingam, the Deputy Director of Education referred to, was because he openly criticized a circular directing that the National Anthem of Sri Lanka be sung in Sinhala only at the National, Safety Day ceremony held In the Jaffna district on December 26th 2010, the anniversary of the tragic Tsunami of 2004.

We wish to state that no circular to this effect has been issued by any government authority, and as such the alleged criticism of such a circular by the diseased could not have taken place.

The NfR states that their Information regarding in this killing has been confirmed by a news item in the website of the Global Tamil News of 28th December 2010. However, the item referred to on this website, only records the killing and makes no reference to the alleged circular referred by the NfR.

The NfR statement also says that the killing on 15.12.2010 of Nithiyananda Sharma, the chief ‘Priest of Chankaanai Murukamoorthy Temple in the Jaffna district, also had a political motive: This position is also rejected as baseless.

Police investigations are in progress into the killing of Mr. Marakandu Sivalingam, the Deputy Director of Education on 26.12.2010. The police have already apprehended suspect with regard to the killing of the Chief Priest of Chankaanal  Murukamoorthy Temple.

The statement by the NfR appears to be an attempt to interfere with the police Investigations in to these two killings. by seeking to, give these tragic incidents an unwarranted political colourlng, and also to discredit the government by this means. It is noted that the steering committee, of the NfR comprises several Sri Lankans Including journalists who are now living in self-proclaimed “self exile” in western countries and they describe themselves as an “exile network for media and human rights in Sri Lanka”. The cause of media and human rights in Sri Lanka cannot be supported by the dissemination of such false Information as the NfR has done

http://www.news.lk/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=16961&Itemid=44

December 29, 2010

Sri Lanka: Director education in Jaffna shot dead for speaking out

by sd

Press release/ 28 December  2010

NfR is shocked to learn that the Deputy  Director of Education of the Valikamam zone of the Jaffna District who refused to direct the students of the schools  in his zone to recite the National Anthem in Sinhala  only,  was shot  dead in Jaffna on the same day when  the controversial  government sponsored Tsunami Commemoration Day Ceremony was held in Jaffna.  He  was shot dead  at  point blank  range on 26.10.2010 by unknown persons  who had arrived at his residence in a van that evening.

Legitimate criticism of any  action of the government  or  its  policy is a right  any citizen  should have in a true democracy.   Criticizing  the  policy of  the Government to  recite the  National Anthem only in Sinhala, is a right of any Sri Lankan.  Killing a person for expressing his disapproval of such a policy  is not only a violation of his freedom of expression but also of his  right to life.

According  to information received from NfR sources in Jaffna, 52-year-old Markandu Sivalingam, the Deputy Director of Education  is reported to have  openly criticized this decision of  the government which had issued a  circular directing that the  National Anthem  should be sung only in Sinhala at the ceremony  and  had  disapproved the call for  the participation of school children at  the ceremony. This information has been confirmed by a news item in the  website of the Global Tamil News  of 28th December, 2010.

Armed men  had arrived in a van that evening and  shot him dead in his house in front of his daughter.  When the armed men entered the house  they had asked his  daughter  for her jewelry.  She  had  screamed calling for her father.  When the  father rushed in  they had shot him ignoring her pleas not to shoot him   and offering them all her jewelry.   Eventually the  killers  had taken  away  only one earring after   Sivalingam had fallen dead.

Earlier on 15th December, 2010  Nithiyananda Sharma,   the Chief Priest of Chankaanai Murukamoorthy temple in the Jaffna District, was killed on 15th December 2010. NfR  is of the opinion that this  killing  too  had a political motive.  Both the killings were  committed   in such a manner  as to make them look  like   killings  while attempting to rob.  Incidents of this nature happening in an area which is under tight security leaves for speculations  on  who the could be.

NfR  condemns  both  these killings in the  strongest of terms and  demands  that the government of Sri Lanka should  initiate independent and impartial inquires into  these incidents to  bring the culprits to  book. Failing in its responsibility to do so,  will only confirm the  widely held belief that State sponsored death squads are behind these incidents.  Until those responsible for these killings  are bought to book  the government will stand  guilty in the eyes of the public.  Besides such inaction will motivate rogue elements among the security forces to take the law into their hands with impunity and the  Government’s claim  of bringing about national reconciliation would remain only a dream.

Issued by:

Steering Committee, NfR Sri Lanka

C/O, 19447, Victory Blvd,#2, Reseda,CA 91335, USA

December 28, 2010

Our National Anthem – A Statement by the Rt. Rev. Duleep de Chickera, the Bishop of Colombo

by sd

I am deeply perturbed with the regrettable Cabinet decision to deprive our Tamil speaking citizens of the right to sing the National Anthem in their mother tongue. The decision amounts to an insensitive shift and conveys a message of exclusion to the Tamil speaking minorities. It will undoubtedly isolate the minorities even further at a time when policy decisions that strengthen National integration should receive priority.

The singing of the National Anthem is every citizen’s right and privilege. It is, like praying; done most meaningfully in one’s mother tongue. Regardless of what other countries do or do not do, our own progressive bi-lingual National Anthem enabled us to demonstrate our loyalty to our Nation together and in our respective mother tongues.

It was a pragmatic and unifying model that Sri Lanka was proud of and should not have been tampered with.

Consequently the Cabinet has no option but to rectify this very serious mistake. I call upon the President, who values the use of the Tamil language, to ensure that this is done without delay and before it creates another minority grievance.

With Peace and Blessings.

Rt. Rev. Duleep de Chickera

December 26, 2010

Only rascals will shun right to information – Sunday Times Editorial

by sd

26/12/2010

At the conclusion of less than even a year since the new Parliament was elected by the people, it might be appropriate to reflect on the performance of our lawmakers and assess how worthy they have been as the representatives of the people.
The final report card, alas, is a grim and dismal one. One of the first things the new MPs did was to get themselves duty-free car permits – and then go on to flog them in the open market pocketing the profits.

This newspaper runs a story stating that 65 of the 225 Members of Parliament have obtained for themselves this facility, cutting across the party divide and showing as they always do in these matters, bi-partisanship of a very high degree; the worst part being that they have lost no time in making a buck out of it. It is therefore clear as clear can be that these MPs did not need a vehicle; they already had comfortable transport. The argument is that this is a mere additional perk that is offered to make some extra cash and which allows them to pay back IOUs they may have taken to contest elections, a costly business.

Whichever way you look at it, this is an exercise that is regularising something that is otherwise irregular. Bluntly put, it is cheating — though the practice has come to be accepted as standard in Parliamentary circles. Up until 1977, many MPs travelled in public transport – in buses and with warrants on long-distance trains. And we daresay the quality of Parliamentary debate and legislative enactments was much higher than today.

The entire exercise of the issue of duty free permits is clothed in secrecy, so much so, our news team had to ferret out the information. The Ministry of Parliamentary Affairs was not prepared to divulge the full list so that at least we can name the truly Honorable MPs who have not availed themselves of this facility. And here is a case where no question will be asked in Parliament because they are all in it together.

This is why there is this urgent need for a Right to Information Law in this country, a law that exists in every democracy, but not in Sri Lanka. This is a law that exists in most Indian states and one that covers the country nationally. It is a law that affords the ordinary citizen the right of access to Government information so that he or she will know how public finances are being spent.

The reason why Sri Lanka is averse to introducing such legislation only leads to speculation that there is a need for massive cover-ups. In the backdrop of a defunct Bribery and Corruption Commission, there is clearly a signal that bribery and corruption is on permanent vacation here. A Right to Information Bill was approved by a former UNP Cabinet way back in 2004 but never passed because Parliament was dissolved prematurely by then President Chandrika Kumaratunga.

In Parliament on September 23 this year, the Chief Government Whip solemnly said that a Right to Information Law was receiving the active consideration of this administration. However, under the Justice Ministry’s report of proposed laws that was tabled in the same Parliament during the budget vote debate such a law is not included on the list. The Justice Ministry under a previous dispensation made an effort at revising the 2004 bill, but clearly, this Government is in no mood to allow the people to know how it spends their monies.

The quality of lawmakers and parliamentarians the world over is on the decline. So commentators say. In countries like the US, however, there is a concerted effort to put systems in place to ensure quality persons get nominated through their party lists and strict Oversight Committees that govern the conduct of Congressmen/ women.

In Britain, the decline has been attributed to the ‘professional politician’ syndrome where the House of Commons is no longer represented by the lawyer, doctor, banker, brick-layer – a representative cross-section of society, but by the research assistant of the sitting MP who must work through the party’s organisational machinery to be picked as a candidate. India’s Parliament is full of wives and relatives of swindlers and murderers who are languishing in jail for their offences. No surprise, therefore, that the Indian Prime Minister is embroiled in a multi-billion rupee telecom tender mega-scandal involving a Minister from Tamil Nadu and his party. In India, the machinery exists to uncover the scandal, however slow moving it may be, and the scandal is now knocking on the door of the Head of Government.

With local council elections due early next year in Sri Lanka, there is once more a call for political parties to draw up a list of candidates. These councils, now overtaken by the Provincial Councils, were the nursery to Parliament, but the less said about most of those graduates, the better.

Already, the Government has done away with what was agreed; to re-introduce the old ward system together with the proportional representation mechanism which means that the Government is comfortable with the PR election system however defective and riddled with corruption. This will mean that only those with unlimited financial resources (if not backed by the State machinery) would be able to succeed at these elections. At least in Britain, MPs have been exposed for spending public finances – having had to declare their expenses. Many of them lost their portfolios, seats and their self-respect in the process.

These checks and balances are absent in Sri Lanka and elected representatives of the people get away scot-free because in the Government’s view the be-all and end-all of governing is to maintain its Parliamentary majority. We have seen the spectacle of MPs who have obtained their seats from one party vote-base so nonchalantly crossing over to the Government accepting portfolios and perks in the process. The courts have given their blessings for these cross-overs.

Questions arise whether democracy is only about periodic elections; and whether the people must enjoy the fruits of free speech, free movement and all those nice things enshrined in their Constitution throughout the year – and have their elected representatives accountable to them throughout their tenure in office. A Right to Information Law will be a step in the right direction if that be the case.

http://www.sundaytimes.lk/101226/Editorial.html

December 25, 2010

SB stopped from delivering lecture

by sd

Saturday, 25 December 2010

Udul in South Africa at the 17th WFYS , says

By Sumaiya Rizvi

Minister of Higher Education S.B. Dissanayake was stopped from delivering a lecture at the 17th World Festival of Youth and Students held in South Africa, Inter University Students Federation (IUSF) convener Udul Premaratne said yesterday.

“We rallied other students around the world and they helped to spearhead a protest against S.B. Dissanayake which stopped him from attending to lecture at the festival,” Mr. Premaratne said. According to him the students were aware of the Minister’s treatment of  students and they supported the IUSF.

“Minister S.B. Dissanayake was to deliver a lecture but it was later cancelled following the protest,” Mr. Premaratne said. Students from all the Asian and European countries took part in the protest outside the place from where the festival was held, he added.

Mr. Premaratne and a few other students from the IUSF took part in the 17th World Festival of Youth and Students held in South Africa recently.

http://print.dailymirror.lk/news/news/30964.html

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.