Photo courtesy: www.lankaenews.com
BBC Sinhala
.............................................................................................................................................................................................
Bennett Rupasinghe, News Editor of LankaeNews was remanded by courts following his arrest by the Wellampitiya police on Thursday.
Media watchdog Reporters Without Borders (RSF) said that he should be released immediately.
RSF research coordinator Gilles Lordet speaking to BBC Sandeshaya said, "this can be seen as part of ongoing harassment against the LankaeNews".
Bennett 'threatned a man'
The Paris based organisation had earlier made an international appeal for help in finding the means to guarantee the physical safety of LankaeNews' journalists.
Police spokesman Prishantha Jayakody says Bennett Rupasinghe, was arrested following a complaint that he had threatened a man by telephone.
Sunil Jayasekara, convener of the group Free Media Movement, says the arrest was made on questionable grounds and is an attempt to silence dissenting media.
"This clearly shows the government is misusing police and judicial powers in addition to extra legal methods against independent media in stifling dissent," said Journalists for Democracy in Sri Lanka (JDS).
Amnesty International's researcher Yolanda Foster called the arrest 'a misuse of executive authority'.
Committee to Protect Journalists (CPJ) says that this situation cries out for immediate international support.
"Given that its editor is in exile, its office recently gutted by fire, and its political cartoonist 'disappeared' for more than a year, the threat to the safety of its remaining staff are clear," said Bob Dietz, CPJ's Asia program coordinator.
'Sinister motives'
Maithree Gunarathne, leading the lawyers team representing LankaeNews told journalists accused the government of 'sinister motives' in harassing journalists.
Prageeth Eknaligoda, a cartoonist working with the website had disappeared over a year ago. His wife has asked for UN intervention to find him after the Sri Lankan government has been unable to provide any information.
In January the LankaeNews office in the Colombo suburbs came under an arson attack. Media organisations have expressed scepticism about the two suspects who have been taken into custody.
The chief editor of LankaeNews has already fled the country and is living in exile.
Sri Lanka is ranked 158th out of 178 countries in the latest Reporters Without Borders press freedom index.
© BBC Sinhala
Thursday, March 31, 2011
International condemnation of journalist arrest
Thursday, March 31, 2011
JDS calls for urgent release of Lanka-E-News journalist
Journalists for Democracy in Sri Lanka
.............................................................................................................................................................................................
JDS URGENT ALERT
2011 March 31 | 13.10 GMT
This is yet another act of intimidation against media freedom in general and Lankaenews in particular by the incumbent government of Sri Lanka.
A senior Sri Lankan journalist and the News Editor of Lankaenews website, Benett Rupasinghe, has been arrested today (31) by the Sri Lankan Police, dealing yet another blow to the already worsened media freedom and human rights situation in the country. Journalists for Democracy in Sri Lanka (JDS) condemns the outrageous arrest of Mr.Rupasinghe in the strongest terms while urging for his immediate release.
This is yet another act of intimidation against media freedom in general and Lankaenews in particular by the incumbent government of Sri Lanka.
Mr. Rupasinghe was arrested when he turned up at the police station on the invitation of the police to record a statement. This clearly shows the government is misusing police and judicial powers in addition to extra-legal methods against independent media in order to stifling dissent.
The office of the Lankaenews in the very outskirts of capital Colombo, was burnt down last month by an “unknown group” of people. No one has been arrested to date in this regard. The Chief Editor of Lankaenews, has already fled the country and is living in exile, fearing persecution.
The JDS appeals to all concerned groups and individuals to take necessary action to demand for immediate release of journalist Benett Rupasinghe.
Please act - Make phone calls and send emails to:
Inspector General of Police Mahinda Balasuriya
Call: +94 1128223788 / +94 1128548865
Email : telligp@police.lk
Executive Committee
Journalists for Democracy in Sri Lanka
Thursday, March 31, 2011
Sri Lankan police arrest editor of website critical of government
By The Associated Press | Yahoo! News
.............................................................................................................................................................................................
Police spokesman Prishantha Jayakody says Bennett Rupasinghe, the editor of LankaeNews.com, was arrested Thursday following a complaint that he had threatened a man by telephone.
Sunil Jayasekara, convener of the group Free Media Movement, says the arrest was made on questionable grounds and is an attempt to silence dissenting media.
A columnist for the website has been missing for more than a year, and its office was set on fire earlier this year.
© Yahoo! News
Monday, March 21, 2011
Living in clover
By Kishali Pinto Jayawardene | The Sunday Times
.............................................................................................................................................................................................
This time around too, we had Commissioner of Elections Dayananda Dissanayake, (besides quite amusingly characterizing this as a ‘pleasant election’), castigating government politicians for abusing state resources. Mr Dissanayake should conserve his energies and refrain from even making such statements when it is patently clear that he intends to do nothing about it.
Inability to be shocked
A courageous and principled Commissioner of Elections would have acted very differently at a point long time ago. It is clear that there is neither courage nor principles involved here in any sense whatsoever. But it is also clear that the situation will not be very different even if we had an Elections Commission, given that its members would be appointed under the 18th Amendment to the Constitution on the President’s sole dictates with little effective intervention by a proverbially toothless Parliamentary Council.
The basic integrity of the electoral process in this country has become deeply suspect following the Presidential polls of 2010 when we witnessed the ghastly spectacle of Mr Dissanayake literally weeping and wailing, though not quite gnashing his teeth, on national television amidst laments that he could not do his job anymore. The fact that he withdrew his unseemly laments three short days later and seemed happier than ever to continue in his job is, of course, old news. But as much as when the nadir is reached, very little has the power to shock or surprise any more, reports of violence, chasing away of polls agents and the misuse of state resources and the state media at the recent polls fail to stir any interest. How can they when so much has gone on before?
Crossing the line
Let me be clear on this point. This is not to say that we had elections as pure as the driven snow in previous years. On the contrary, the Wayamba elections will always be an ugly scar on the face of the Kumaratunge administration and many were the instances in previous years when elections were marred by violence and fraud. However, there was always a sense that a line should not be crossed. Indeed, the Wayamba example is a good one in this respect. As ugly as it was, public outrage at the level of intimidation and violence was strong and compelled a political response on the part of the then government. We have little of that public outrage left now regrettably.
On its part, a weak and pathetically ineffective Opposition is only able to issue frivolous statements from time to time urging the masses to rise up in revolt against a corrupt government. Cumulatively, the collapse of the Opposition is to the detriment of not only itself or indeed to the wider public interest as a whole. It is also to the detriment of the government. History always teaches us that a government with no opposition, either from public opinion or from alternative political parties, will tend towards despotism and ultimately its own destruction. What we see in the Middle East is a good reflection. This is perhaps a fitting lesson that Sri Lanka will learn in the years ahead.
Ironies in the negation of the law
At each and every point, the ironies in the manner in which the law is negated, are enormous. In the old systems, as flawed and problematic as public offices were, there was a semblance of dignity and integrity about them. We are already painfully aware of the fate that has befallen the Elections Commissioner. Another example is our doing away with the office of the Bribery Commissioner and instead installing a Bribery Commission in place along with what was said to be a vastly improved law on bribery and corruption. The effects and results of this ‘vastly improved law’ (however true this may be in theory) are negligible down the years.
Even when efforts are taken by the Commission to bring corrupt officials to justice, these efforts are negated at various levels, either through insufficiency of state resources, political infiltration of the Commission and at a higher level, political infiltration of the legal process. How can the result be any different when the overpowering authority of the executive determines the manner in which decisions are taken at all stages of the legal process? The bringing of the Department of the Attorney General under the direct supervision of the Presidential Secretariat was no accident after all surely?
Living in corruption and clover
In the meantime, the spoils are there for the most visible taking. Those victorious at the jostling for seats at the polls this week are now for a grand time in office where the pickings at the local government level (though nothing compared to the stupendous corruption at the national level) will still suffice to keep them in clover for a considerable period of time. We should wish them well indeed.
© The Sunday Times
Monday, March 21, 2011
Sri Lanka: Using elections to disable democracy
By Tisaranee Gunasekara | The Sunday Leader
.............................................................................................................................................................................................
“His smiling picture is everywhere…. He’s given his name to all the squares….
He’s burned the last soothsayer — Who failed to kneel before the idol….
From the Caribbean to China’s Great Wall — The dictator-dragon is being cloned.”
— Abd al-Wahhab al-Bayyati (The Dragon)
The election took place in a context totally advantageous to the regime. The 18th Amendment had tilted the electoral-field firmly in its favour. The opposition is in unprecedented disarray. Polling took place mostly in rural/suburban areas where the Rajapaksas enjoy considerable popularity. Elections for all municipal councils were postponed, to save the UPFA from a humiliating defeat in Colombo. The governing coalition ignored election laws with impunity and abused state power and resources at will.
Defeat was impossible under such conditions.
And yet, instead of taking the election in their stride, the Rajapaksas campaigned with manic energy. This poll, though unimportant as an electoral battle, was of immense significance as a political contestation. What was at stake was not just power at the local government level but also the Rajapaksas’ capacity to maintain their hegemony in the South, including within the SLFP. A less-than-total win would weaken the Ruling Family’s standing in the country and loosen its grip on the SLFP.
A stunning victory would enhance the ‘Rajapaksa magic’ and convince rank and file SLFPers to shift their allegiance unreservedly from the Bandaranaike-dynasty to the Rajapaksa-dynasty.
So the President and his siblings spearheaded the election campaign while senior SLFPers were reduced to a barely visible ancillary role. Under Rajapaksa tutelage, the campaign became a hot-war against the opposition and a cold-war against the remaining pockets of (passive) resistance to Rajapaksa Rule within the SLFP. The main focus was on Hambantota, the traditional Rajapaksa fiefdom and Gampaha, the former Bandaranaike stronghold, which Basil Rajapaksa is intent on taking over.
Interestingly, Brother Basil, rather than First Son Namal, functioned as the second-in-command to the President, demonstrating that this is still Rajapaksa Brothers Inc. (though it may metamorphose into Rajapaksa and Sons Inc. someday.) The campaign also debunked persistent rumours about a major ‘fall-out’ within the Ruling Family.
There would be differences of opinion among various members of the family, as well as incompatibilities created by competitive personal agendas (for instance, between Uncle Basil and Nephew Namal). But these are mere ‘tiffs’ of no strategic import and do not prevent genuine unity in defence of the overall Familial Project.
A Dysfunctional Society
Despots want their people to become permanent navel-gazers. A despot’s utopia is a society in which people live in their own petty private worlds surrounded by massive psychological ramparts. Milton Meyer has pointed out that non-interference was what the Nazis wanted from ordinary Germans: “Absolutely nothing was expected of them except to go on as they had paying their taxes, reading their local paper and listening to the radio” (They Thought They were Free). Similarly the Rajapaksas want nothing more from Sri Lankans than passive, silent acquiescence to their rule. Their ideal is an accommodationist mindset, characterised by indifference and apathy, and a temperament which ignores even the most obvious injustices because of a deep-seated belief that ‘nothing can be done’. A Rajapaksa landslide at the election will etch this deadly and deadening fatalism ever more deeply into the collective Southern-psyche by making long term Rajapaksa Rule seem even more of a fait accompli than before.
Despots prefer dysfunctional societies purged of natural compassion and human solidarity, especially across primordial or political barriers. They compel people to focus on dividing lines rather than on unifying factors, thereby reducing drastically the politico-psychological space for common vision and common action.
The Rajapaksas would want their Southern base to believe that their draconian policies towards civilian Tamils or Colombo’s poor are correct. They would want the Sinhalese to be indifferent to the forced registration of Tamils, the non-poor to be indifferent to mass eviction of the poor and the well-fed to be indifferent to the fact that 20% of Lankan children are undernourished.
The Rajapaksas would regard with paranoia the idea of oppositional unity across ethnic, religious and class lines on the basis of political freedom and socio-economic justice (a project of politico-social liberalism in contradistinction to economic neo-liberalism). Their counter is Sinhala Supremacism masquerading as patriotism; and resurrecting the dead Tiger periodically to keep ethnic over determination alive.
A key lesson of Arab revolutions is the decisive role of the military. If the army is not a national entity but the security force of the Ruling Family, it does not cavil at reacting with overwhelming violence to unarmed protests. Such an army would either crush a peaceful uprising immediately or cause it to change its peaceful character and become violent, by compelling protestors to arm themselves in sheer self-defence. The regime can then characterise the revolution as a civil war and drown it in a blood-tide, as Muammar Gaddafi is doing in Libya. The Libyan Army (unlike the armies in Egypt and Tunisia and even in Bahrain) is not a national entity but a mere praetorian guard for the Gaddafi Family. This is no accident but the outcome of deliberate policy; during his 42 year rule, Gaddafi destroyed the relative autonomy of the Libyan Army and turned it into his personal tool.
In Sri Lanka, the process of Rajapaksising the Armed Forces is well underway. The siblings have deployed for this purpose their signature carrot-and-stick policy, symbolised in the contrasting fates of Gen. Sarath Fonseka and Gen. Shavendra Silva. Gen. Fonseka is a prisoner in Welikada jail, while Gen. Silva is in New York, as Sri Lanka’s Deputy Permanent Ambassador to the UN. The message these antipodal ends send to every serving or retired officer is as unmistakable as the message sent by the pre-emptive sacking of Mangala Samaraweera to SLFP seniors – no one is big enough to escape the wrath of the Rajapaksas.
Total, unquestioning loyalty to the Ruling Family is the only option available to those who want to avoid trouble and get ahead in life. Mussolini defined his fascist model as “All within the state, nothing outside the state, nothing against the state”. ‘All within the Family, nothing outside the Family, nothing against the Family’ is the Rajapaksa ethos.
Despots believe that their rule represent the end of history. But a day comes when the promise of bread, the reality of expensive circuses and the fear of barbarians at the gate cease to suffice. The Rajapaksa Rule will last for a while, but this ‘low dishonest decade’ (or decades) will end someday. The democracy tsunami cannot be confined to the Arab World, nor will Sri Lanka be immune to the democratic Zeitgeist of the new century. The Rajapaksas have already begun to prepare for this future danger by working diligently to erase the line of demarcation between the Ruling Family and the Armed Forces. Their aim would be to turn the Lankan military into their praetorian guard, a debased force which will not balk at mowing down unarmed and peaceful Sinhala protesters.
© The Sunday Leader
Saturday, March 19, 2011
In Sri Lanka, seeking to square the circle
Photo courtesy: Yamuni Rashmika
By K. Venkataramanan | The Hindu
.............................................................................................................................................................................................
Indian High Commissioner Nirupam Sen's suggestion did not convince Mr. Wickremesinghe, from whose Cabinet the Defence, Interior and Mass Commuication portfolios were taken away by Ms. Kumaratunga in November 2003. However, according to the contents of a conversation between Milinda Moragoda, a senior Cabinet Minister who was coordinating the peace process from the government side, and Jeffrey J. Lunstead, the U.S. Ambassador to Sri Lanka, the Prime Minister had no objection to India trying to sell the proposal to the President while she was in Islamabad for the SAARC summit in January 2004.
Mr. Lunstead reported the development in a cable dated December 29, 2003 (12953: confidential), accessed by The Hindu through WikiLeaks. The context was the lengthy stalemate in the peace process after the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE) withdrew from the peace talks in April 2003 and, six months and hundreds of ceasefire violations later, came up, on October 31, with a controversial proposal for an ‘Interim Self-Governing Authority' for the northeast. Four days later, Ms. Kumaratunga, marginalised in the decision-making regarding the peace process and left with the feeling that her presidency was not given the respect it deserved, divested the Defence, Interior and Information Ministers of their portfolios. This resulted in the ‘cohabitation crisis' reaching a point of no-return. Mr. Wickremesinghe thought he could not pursue peace without control over the military – as maintaining the ceasefire was the foundation of the process – and believed that a fresh parliamentary election was the only way out.
On December 26, Mr. Moragoda met Mr. Lunstead to review his upcoming visit to the U.S. and told the latter that the only effort to resolve the political stalemate “was a proposal being brokered by Indian High Commissioner Sen following his consultations in Delhi.” The Ambassador said: “Sen was pushing the idea that the regional commands (for the North and the East, presumably) could be carved out of the Defense Ministry and put under Prime Minister Ranil Wickremesinghe's control. This would give him the operational control he needed to resume the peace negotiations. Milinda [Moragoda] did not know if this idea would fly. Even the PM was not fully convinced it was useful, but he was willing to let Sen try it out on the President. Milinda thought that the Indians would push this idea with President Chandrika Bandarnaike Kumaratunga (CBK) at the SAARC summit in Islamabad in early January.”
In a cable sent two days later, on December 31, 2003, containing a report on the handing over of a letter from Secretary of State Colin Powell to Mr. Wickremesinghe (12992: confidential), Mr. Lunstead said he had asked the Prime Minister if there was any chance of Mr. Sen's initiative succeeding. “PM said he did not think this would go anywhere, and even if he liked it, he did not think the Service Chiefs would accept it.”
Chandrika willing
According to a cable sent on January 5, 2004, Mr. Lunstead spoke on January 2 to Mr. Sen, who, “without any prompting,” said: “The technical means of squaring the circle are available. The problem is that Ranil does not want that much – he wants everything. She (the president) is willing to compromise, the problem now is his objection to accepting any piecemeal solution” (13027: confidential).
Mr. Sen explained that the President was looking for a way out by offering to delegate a number of defence matters to the Prime Minister, “but the PM was trying to get everything.” He added that External Affairs Minister Yashwant Sinha and Prime Minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee might raise the issue with the President during the SAARC summit.
Throwing light on what exactly Ms. Kumaratunga's ‘way out' was, Mr. Lunstead said in another part of the same cable, while recounting his meeting with Ms. Kumaratunga to deliver a separate letter from Mr. Powell, that she was willing to make Mr. Wickremesinghe Minister of National Security and turn over to him parts of the Defence portfolio related to the peace process.
Mr. Lunstead's own comments show that the U.S. did believe that the Prime Minister could not be blamed for the impasse, but at the same time he should be told that he should “give some meaningful role to the President, if he expects her to give him back operational control over defense.”
“We have urged her to compromise, and will continue to do so, but she will not listen to us if we ask her to consent to her own political oblivion,” he observed.
When Mr. Moragoda said on December 26 that during his U.S. visit he planned to convey to the Deputy Secretary [Richard Armitage] that the international community should understand that the President caused the crisis and was prolonging it with her obstinacy, Mr. Lunstead replied that the U.S. understood that the President had caused the crisis but its public statements had to be relatively even-handed.
The Indian efforts, however, did not bear fruit as Ms. Kumaratunga dissolved Parliament soon and called fresh elections that were held in April 2004 and brought her party back to power.
© The Hindu
Saturday, March 19, 2011
5,653 cases of ‘disappeared’ pending in Sri Lanka: Forum-Asia at 16th session of UNHRC
Tamil Net
.............................................................................................................................................................................................
Increased militarization in the Northeast has created an environment of intense insecurity for resettled communities especially for female-headed families who are particularly vulnerable to sexual exploitation and abuse, Ms. Patel pointed out.
Participating the 16th sessions of the UNHRC, Ms Patel said that Sri Lanka did not positively respond to Special Rapporteur on Independence of Judges and Lawyers, Independent Expert on Minority Rights (2007/2009), Working Group on Enforced or Involuntary disappearances (2006,2007,2008 and 2009), Special Rapporteur on Human Rights Defenders (2008) and Special Rapporteur on Freedom of Expression (2009), to visit the island.
She was also referring to the Systematic erosion of democratic structures and institutions, the removal of safeguards against the concentration of power on the Executive President through the 18th Amendment to the Constitution and the placement of the NGO Secretariat under the Ministry of Defence.
© Tamil Net
Saturday, March 19, 2011
Sri Lanka's Polls Chief regrets misuse of state media
Daily Mirror
.............................................................................................................................................................................................
He said several incidents of thuggery were reported during the period between nomination day and Election Day.
“One marked feature of the election campaign was the competition even among candidates of the same party for preference votes.
However, it was possible to conduct the poll in a fairly pleasant atmosphere when compared with previous local council elections,” he said in his statement at the conclusion of the elections.
“Nominations of candidates for 301 local authorities comprising four Municipal Councils, 39 Urban Councils and 258 Pradeshiya Sabhas took place from January 20 to January 27. A total of 2,047 nomination papers were received of which 1,595 were accepted and 452 rejected for various reasons,” he said.
Mr. Dissanayake said some of the affected parties sought legal remedy in regard to 68 rejected nominations.
“I wish to thank District Returning Officers, Deputy, Senior Assistant and Assistant Commissioners of the districts who performed a heavy task in a short period in the midst of various obstacles. The services rendered by Divisional Secretaries at the Divisional level and Grama Niladharis at the village level have to be appreciated. I highly value the services rendered in managing the organizational work at the Elections Secretariat by the Additional Commissioners, Deputy Commissioner, Assistant Commissioner, Accountants, Staff Officers in the Computer Division, Administrative Officer and the Consultants who have been assisting the Department at various times,” he said.
Mr. Dissanayake said the Police Department was called upon to provide security at all polling stations and to election staff; voters and candidates. “The Sri Lanka Police, which understood its responsibility in this connection, gave of their best in providing the security required. My thanks go to the Police Department, Civil Security Force, Special Task Force and the Sri Lanka Army for the services rendered in this connection. A word of thanks is also due to the Government Printer and his staff for assisting the Department by executing all the printing requirements in time and also the staff of the Ceylon Electricity Board, Sri Lanka Telecom, Ceylon Petroleum Corporation and the Government Factory for executing our demands expeditiously,” he said.
“I also appreciate the services rendered by the Sri Lanka Government Railway, Sri Lanka Transport Board and Private Bus Operators by providing transport facilities to the poll staff and voters. Many polling stations were situated in religious premises and on private lands. I thank the owners of such premises for readily releasing the facilities,” Mr. Dissanayake said. “The officers who assisted in scrutinizing the results of the election prepared by the Returning Officers, the staff of the University of Colombo School of computing who facilitated the release of the results to the media and the Sri Lanka Telecom which provided the communication facility in this connection and helped in releasing the results to the public. The active participation by PAFFREL and CMEV and other non-governmental organizations, which rendered a much needed service in ensuring a free and fair election was invaluable and finally, I take this opportunity to thank the leaders and secretaries of political parties, candidates and the voters who co-operated with me in conducting a peaceful, free and fair election.”
© Daily Mirror
Friday, March 18, 2011
Sri Lanka: The son also rises
The Economist
.............................................................................................................................................................................................
Sri Lanka’s president since 2005, Mahinda Rajapaksa, is evidently giving the matter some thought. His government is already dominated by several Rajapaksa brothers, including a fierce one, Gotabaya, who oversees defence, and a more nimble-minded one, Basil, who runs economic policy. Now the 65 year-old president, who last month denied a rumour that he was being treated for cancer, is increasingly eager to promote his son, Namal Rajapaksa.
The 24-year-old MP is frequently taken on foreign trips by his father. In January he was dispatched to Libya to deliver a formal invitation for Muammar Qaddafi to visit Sri Lanka, to improve the “strong personal relationship” between the two country’s leaders.
At home excuses are rustled up to keep him in the limelight. Last month he dispensed the man-of-the-match award at Sri Lanka’s opening game of the cricket world cup, which took place in a newly built stadium in—by happy coincidence—his own constituency, Hambantota, in the south of the country. A few days earlier the portly young politician had been shown laying a foundation stone for a new office complex, funded by the Asian Development Bank; just before that he was named chairman of a new fund to protect a forest and an ancient pink quartz mountain range, the National Namal Uyana.
He is on hand to inaugurate new bridges and roads. As the head of a national body, Tharunyata Hetak (“aspiring youth”), he is whisked north—a chopper is usually on call—to dish out cash, books and other aid to victims of the civil war. His group has its own television channel, which shows him doing the dishing. He enjoys fawning—sorry, perceptive—coverage from state press and broadcasters.
His year-long political career has been charmed. His constituency, a Rajapaksa family stronghold since the 1930s, has been chosen as the site of a new international airport, a conference centre, hotels and other big projects. In November he officiated with his father at the opening of a large, Chinese-built harbour in Hambantota. Now young Mr Rajapaksa, charming, London-educated and fond of rugby, is leading a bid for Hambantota to host the 2018 Commonwealth games.
A presidential change will not happen overnight. Mr Rajapaksa père remains popular among the Sinhalese majority for helping to force a decisive, brutal end to a civil war two years ago. He won a thumping re-election last year and has since pushed through constitutional changes that give him more clout and let him seek a third term, probably at an election in 2016. But preparing the son looks to be a form of insurance policy.
The opposition is hoping for a ruling family feud, as the son vies with his uncle to be heir-apparent (Basil had previously been touted as a successor). But Namal’s promotion may suit the whole family. It must fend off accusations that thousands of Tamil Tiger opponents and civilians were massacred at the dreadful climax of the war. Frequent foreign demands for an inquiry, and an attempt by the United Nations to launch one, have soured Western relations with Sri Lanka.
Patching up foreign ties and reconciliation with the aggrieved Tamils are the most important tasks facing Sri Lanka’s rulers. These are much harder while Mahinda remains the face of government. If the Rajapaksas want a dynasty preserved for many years, preparing the way for a young insider, untainted by any role in the war, could be the family’s canniest strategy.
© The Economist
Friday, March 18, 2011
Global Energy eyeing refinery deal in Sri Lanka's Hambantota
By Santhush Fernando | The Bottom Line
.............................................................................................................................................................................................
The refinery estimated to cost between US $ 1.5 to 2bn (Rs.166.5 to 222bn), is said to be thrice the size of the current state-run Sapugaskanda Refinery and will mainly refine crude oil for the export market, with Hambantota poised to become a mega global hub in energy, shipping and aviation.
Petroleum Corporation and a current director of Chevron Lubricants Lanka Plc is the local coordinator for the project while a former DGM of CPC and a Geology professor of University of Peradeniya is also involved in the project. Already they have 24 employees with them,” a high ranking official of the Ministry of Petroleum Industry told The Bottom Line.
However, he added that it was unfortunate that the line ministry was not kept informed that a MoU on a petroleum industry-related project was signed.
“No one knows which government institution has signed this MoU. The Ministry Secretary Titus Jayawardene was not aware of these developments. How can the ministry take a proper decision on whether to go ahead with the US $ 2.2bn Sapugaskanda Project if it is not aware of the private project! The Ministry or the CPC cannot gamble with funds because these are public moneys which the country must repay later on. If the private refinery is coming up, it is good because we may not have to find a staggering amount such as Rs. 244.2bn (US $ 2.2bn),” he lamented.
Numerous energy experts and think tanks have time and again emphasised the need to have a refinery in Hambantota if the country was to emerge as a global player in the energy industry.
“Various parties have applied for refineries in Hambantota. South Korea, ETA Ascon of Dubai and Petrochina subsidiary - China HuanQiu Contracting and Engineering Corporation that built the Muthurajawela tank farm, are among them. But Global Energy is said to have been eying this since 2000 and had also concluded a preliminary feasibility study. They seem to be very serious about the refinery project,” he added.
Meanwhile The Bottom Line exclusively reported last week that a high-powered government delegation was scheduled to visit Iran, in a bid to revive the Rs. 244bn Sapugaskanda Oil Refinery Expansion and Modernisation (SOREM) project that has been in the limbo since 2007 and to appeal Iranian authorities to extend repayment period up to twenty years.
In 2007, The Nation exclusively reported that UAE-based ETA Aston Group was planning to invest US 1.2bn in mega oil refinery in Hambantota, and had also identified a 400 acres of Mahaweli land in Mirrijjawila.
Last year, Petroleum Industries Minister Susil Premajayantha announced that he had received a proposal from Petrochina subsidiary - China Huanqiu Contracting and Engineering Corp to set up a refinery in the Hambantota district targeting the export market. Petrochina or China National Petroleum Corporation (CNPC) is China’s largest oil and gas producer and supplier, as well as one of the world’s major oilfield service providers and a globally reputed contractor in engineering construction, with a presence in nearly 70 countries.
© The Bottom Line
Friday, March 18, 2011
Sri Lanka: Alongside the A9 highway to war-torn Jaffna
Photo courtesy: Shantan Kumarasamy | WSWS
World Socialist Web Site
.............................................................................................................................................................................................
The images were taken by photojournalist Shantan Kumarasamy during a recent journey along the A9 highway, which connects the rest of the island with the Jaffna Peninsula. The photographs record the landscape from Omantai, in the Vanni, to Chunnakam, a suburban settlement in Jaffna.
Following the last phase of the war, over 284,000 people from the Vanni who survived the bloody front-line conflict were incarcerated in military-run camps, such as the infamous Menik Farm. Over 25,000 people remain incarcerated in Manik Farm while the remainder have been “resettled” to their towns and villages, or with relatives.
Due to the heavy fighting, shelling and aerial bombardment, few permanent structures exist in the so-called “resettled areas” of Kilinochchi, Mannar and Mullaitivu districts. Those who were “resettled” were given plastic sheeting for housing, along with a few other household items, and promised 25,000 rupees ($US225)—5,000 rupees of this in cash and the rest to be deposited in a bank account.
Another 60,000 people in Sri Lanka’s North and East, some of them living in temporary shelters since the early 1980s, remain “displaced” because their homes and businesses were taken over by the military to create official and unofficial High Security Zones.
Eighteen months after the end of the war, there are about 40,000 army officers and soldiers in the Jaffna Peninsula, a ratio of approximately 1:11 of military personnel to civilians. In the Vanni region, the ratio is about 1: 4. According to some estimates, almost 147,000 civilians are missing from the Vanni.
Click here to access the slide show.
© WSWS
Friday, March 18, 2011
Sri Lanka local polls swept by ruling party
Lanka Business Online
.............................................................................................................................................................................................
The main opposition was trailing in third place by mid morning Friday, with results in 234 local bodies being declared. The UPFA has won 205, Tamil National Alliance going by the acronym ITAK, which contests mainly in the north and the east 12, Sri Lanka Muslim Congress 04, Up Country Peoples Front 01.
The Marxist-Nationalist Janatha Vimukthi Peramuna, a former coalition ally which later backed defeated presidential candidate Sarath Fonseka failed to win a single local body.
It lost Tissamharama Pradeshiya Sabha, deep in president Rajapaksa's home constituency in Hambantota in the south of the country.
Elections in some areas were postponed after prospective candidates whose lists were rejected by the election went to court. Polls in Colombo city, a traditional opposition stronghold, were also not held.
In the areas that elections were held, the UPFA had polled around 55 percent, the UNP 33 percent and the JVP and other parties collectively about 8.0 percent.
The ruling coalition is riding high on a war victory in 2009 and strong economic growth in 2010 though inflation has been rising and food prices have been generally high due to protectionist agricultural policy.
The elections was marred by at least one death following clashes between supporters of the ruling coalition and voter turnout was low by Sri Lankan standards of around 50 percent according to reports.
© LBO
Thursday, March 17, 2011
How India kept pressure off Sri Lanka
By Nirupama Subramanian | The Hindu
.............................................................................................................................................................................................
The cables reveal that while India conveyed its concern to Sri Lanka several times about the “perilous” situation that civilians caught in the fighting faced, it was not opposed to the anti-LTTE operation.
They also show that India worried about the Sri Lankan President's “post-conflict intentions,” though it believed that there was a better chance of persuading him to offer Sri Lankan Tamils an inclusive political settlement after the fighting ended.
After its efforts to halt the operation failed, the international community resigned itself to playing a post-conflict role by using its economic leverage, acknowledging that it had to rope in India for this.
In the closing stages of the war, New Delhi played all sides, always sharing the concern of the international community over the humanitarian situation and alleged civilian casualties in the Sri Lankan military campaign, but discouraging any move by the West to halt the operations.
In January 2009, External Affairs Minister Pranab Mukherjee made a “short notice” visit to Sri Lanka. The Indian Deputy High Commissioner in Colombo, Vikram Misri, briefed the U.S. Deputy Chief of Mission and other diplomats about the visit, in a cable dated January 29, 2009 (189383: confidential).
At a two-hour meeting at President Rajapaksa's residence, attended by the army chief, defence secretary and other top officials, Mr. Mukherjee stressed he was in Colombo with “no objective other than to ensure that human rights and safety of civilians were protected.”
Mr. Misri told the diplomats that while domestic political considerations were a factor in the Indian calculus, “New Delhi is deeply worried about the humanitarian crisis in the Vanni. He added that Indians throughout the country, not just in Tamil Nadu, are troubled by the high level of casualties sustained by Tamil civilians caught in the crossfire.”
From Mr. Mukherjee's statement at the end of his visit, it was clear that India did not oppose the operations. “I stressed that military victories offer a political opportunity to restore life to normalcy in the Northern Province and throughout Sri Lanka, after twenty three years of conflict. The President assured me that this was his intent.”
Indian theme
This was to remain the Indian theme, except for a brief period in April 2009, when New Delhi, under pressure in the context of elections in Tamil Nadu — the Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam (DMK), a partner in the ruling United Progressive Alliance (UPA), was feeling the heat of the Sri Lankan operations — made an attempt to press for a pause in the operations, if not a cessation.
In a meeting with U.S. Embassy Charge d'Affaires Peter Burleigh on April 15, 2009, Foreign Secretary Shivshankar Menon said the Sri Lankan government had made clear it “did not want a UN Envoy in resolving the conflict with the LTTE, nor was the GSL interested now in direct negotiations with the LTTE or in a cease-fire”, which is in a cable sent on April 15, 2009 (202476: confidential).
The Foreign Secretary told Mr. Burleigh that the Indian government had advised Sri Lanka against rejecting all such proposals out of hand and “offered a suggestion that the GSL consider offering an amnesty to all but the hard core of the LTTE.”
But he also pointed out there were questions about what constituted the LTTE's core and what modalities would be used to make such an offer.
The Foreign Secretary “acknowledged that the space for such discussions was small and flagged President Rajapaksa's electoral considerations as militating against anything that could be viewed as a concession to the LTTE. ‘Quiet diplomacy' outside of Sri Lanka faced serious challenges and the Sri Lankan government would have to ‘be dragged, kicking and screaming' to talks.”
Mr. Menon highlighted another problem: in “India's view, the group was sending conflicting signals and there was a real question as to who spoke for Prabhakaran”. He also questioned whether Prabhakaran understood the situation he faced.
Ruling out the possibility of Indian involvement in any such process between the LTTE and the Sri Lankan government, Mr. Menon told the U.S. official that the ongoing elections in India made such efforts “impossible.”
Still, he left Mr. Burleigh with the impression that India was not opposed to the idea of talks at that late stage.
“He asked whether the U.S. was interested in such talks and said India would think about participation, perhaps with other states under UN auspices, in an effort to obtain a peaceful conclusion to the conflict,” the charge wrote in the cable.
Three weeks later, U.K. Special Envoy for Sri Lanka Des Browne, visiting New Delhi on May 6-7, heard from Foreign Secretary Menon and National Security Adviser (NSA) M.K. Narayanan(cable 206806: confidential, May 13, 2009), that while there was “domestic political pressure” on India to do more on Sri Lanka due to the ongoing elections (the Tamil Nadu Assembly election was on May 13), “there was little anyone could do to alleviate the fighting as Sri Lanka government forces moved towards the end game of defeating the LTTE.”
A British High Commission contact briefing the U.S. Embassy political counselor on this meeting said the Indian officials were concerned about the humanitarian situation, but “were more upbeat on chances to persuade President Rajapaksa to offer Tamils a political solution once fighting had ended.
The two Indian officials were “slightly more optimistic of the chances to persuade President Rajapaksa to offer the Tamils a genuinely inclusive political settlement once fighting had ended. It was the Indians' impression that President Rajapaksa believed this was his moment in history, i.e., a chance to bring peace to the island for good, but that the Sri Lankan Army was an obstacle, having been emboldened by its victory over the LTTE.” They told Mr. Browne that if Sri Lanka did not implement the “13th Amendment Plus” devolution plan quickly, a new terrorist movement could quickly fill the vacuum left by the LTTE's defeat.
Their advice to the British special envoy: it was “useful to have Sri Lanka on the UNSC's agenda, and to issue periodic Presidential Statements, but it would be counterproductive for the UN to ‘gang up' on Colombo; providing Rajapaksa with a rationale for fighting off international pressure would only serve to bolster his domestic political standing.”
On May 15, the U.S. Charge met Mr. Menon again for “a discussion on the urgent humanitarian situation” in Sri Lanka, in a cable sent on May 15, 2009 (207268: confidential).
Acknowledging the “dire situation,” the Foreign Secretary said pressure needed to be put on the Sri Lankan government to avoid civilian causalities. But once again, “he cautioned that bilateral diplomacy would be more effective than highly public pressure in the UN Security Council or the Human Rights Council.”
For a ‘pause'
By then, under pressure from UPA coalition partner and Tamil Nadu Chief Minister M. Karunanidhi, New Delhi had already tried to get the Sri Lankan government to go easy on the war-front.
On April 23, Mr. Burleigh wrote (203792: confidential) of his meeting that day with the Indian Foreign Secretary.
Mr. Menon told him that in a phone call to U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton later that day, External Affairs Minister Pranab Mukherjee would propose that the U.S. and India coordinate an international effort to force the Sri Lankan government “to take appropriate political steps to bring stability to Sri Lanka and a return to normalcy in the Tamil regions.”
He told Mr. Burleigh that the Indian Cabinet had decided to make “a new appeal to pause military operations” and provide relief to civilians trapped in the war zone.
Mr. Menon and Mr. Narayanan then made a quick visit to Colombo on April 24. On their return, the NSA told Mr. Burleigh, in a cable sent on April 25 (204118: confidential), that the Sri Lankan President had “more or less” committed to “a cessation of hostilities”.
Mr. Rajapakse would make the announcement on April 27 after consulting his Cabinet. Mr. Narayanan asked the U.S. to “keep quiet” about it until it came.
The announcement did come, but not for a cessation of hostilities. Declaring that combat operations had ended, the Sri Lankan government announced heavy-calibre weapons would no longer be used. The Defence Ministry warned this was not a cessation of hostilities or ceasefire, and said the push into a 10-km swathe of land where the LTTE leader and the members of his inner circle were holed in would continue.
Briefing Delhi-based diplomats during his May 6-7 visit, Des Browne, the U.K. special envoy, said he believed Sri Lanka could be forced through monetary inducements to accept a post-conflict role for the international community, according to the cable sent on May 13, 2009 (206806: confidential).
“At the end of the day they'll want the money,” Mr. Burleigh quoted the U.K. special envoy as saying. Mr. Browne noted that the government had expended “vast resources” for the war, and emphasised India's “unique role” in the post-conflict scene.
But it appears that the U.S. was worried India might shy away from such a role, and Mr. Burliegh suggested in his cable that “the time is ripe to press India to work more concretely with us on Sri Lanka issues.”
© The Hindu
Thursday, March 17, 2011
US threatens Sri Lankan government over war crimes
By Sampath Perera | World Socialist Web Site
.............................................................................................................................................................................................
In an interview with AFP in Colombo on February 28, Blake pointedly referred to Libya, noting that accusations against Muammar Gaddafi had been referred to the International Criminal Court.
Feigning US concern over human rights violations and the settlement of internally displaced persons during the civil war, Blake stated: “[I]f Sri Lanka is not willing to meet international standards regarding these matters there will be pressure to appoint some sort of international commission to look into these things.”
Blake’s statements are entirely hypocritical. The Obama administration is not only responsible for its own civilian atrocities and the other war crimes it is continuing to perpetrate in Afghanistan, Pakistan, Iraq and elsewhere; it is also complicit in what has happened in Sri Lanka.
Washington fully backed President Mahinda Rajapakse government’s war against the LTTE, providing military and intelligence support. The Sri Lankan military’s savage bombardment of the area controlled by the LTTE in northern Sri Lanka killed 7,000 civilians between January and May 2009 according to UN estimates. The International Crisis Group put the death toll much higher, at 30,000 to 75,000 civilian deaths. At the end of the war, 280,000 displaced civilians were illegally detained in military-run camps. Thousands of Tamil youth were dragged into secret detention camps.
The US and European powers raised the human rights issues only during the final stages of the war, not because of sympathy for Tamils but to undermine Beijing’s influence in Colombo. China had emerged as a major supporter of the Rajapakse government’s war, providing funds and weapons to strengthen its economic and political influence.
In his interview, Blake added: “The United Nations Security Council unanimously passed a resolution against Libya on Saturday night. One of the provisions of that resolution was to refer Muammar Gaddafi to the International Criminal Court so that they could investigate alleged war crimes and abuses against his people. So this is a common thing.”
A former US ambassador to Sri Lanka, Blake claimed he “didn’t mean a direct comparison” with Sri Lanka. Nevertheless, he added “around the world there is an interest in assuring accountability for crimes that have been committed”.
Blake further insisted that “accountability” for war crimes could not be “swept under the carpet” and noted: “If you look at longstanding cases like what happened in Serbia and cases like that, eventually people were brought to justice for the crimes they committed.”
The White House official was referring to former Serbian President Slobodan Milosevic, who was forcibly brought to trial. In reality, not only Milosevic but also the US and European powers and their client regimes in the former Yugoslavia were responsible for breaking up that country and the resulting communal violence.
It is true that Rajapakse and his ruling cabal and the military hierarchy have committed war crimes. The working class and the Tamil masses, however, cannot expect any justice from the Obama administration. Blake’s statements are a thinly-veiled threat that Rajapakse and his closest collaborators could be hauled before an international investigation unless they toe the line of the US.
In another sign of mounting US pressure on the Rajapakse government, on March 1, the US Senate unanimously adopted a non-binding resolution presented by Robert Casey, a senior Pennsylvanian Democratic senator, calling for “an independent international accountability mechanism to look into reports of war crimes”.
Toward the end of 2009, a US Senate Committee on Foreign Relations report signalled a policy change toward Colombo, suggesting that the human rights issues be played down in order to combat China’s influence. Declaring that “the US cannot afford to lose Sri Lanka” and citing the island’s location in strategically important sea lanes, the committee proposed that the US should not have a single agenda of human rights. The report particularly mentioned China’s close relations with Sri Lanka.
Nonetheless, the Obama administration retained the human rights complaints as a card to play against the Colombo government, while endorsing Rajapakse’s own inquiry, a hand-picked Lessons Learned and Reconciliation Commission (LLRC).
Blake’s intervention indicates US concern over the Rajapakse government’s continued leaning toward China. The London-based Times observed last November that “Chinese banks are enthusiastic buyers of Sri Lankan government bonds.”
By mid-2010, China’s overall “assistance” to Sri Lanka topped $US3 billion. Chinese investment in the tourism industry hit $1 billion early this year after Shangri La and the China Aero-Technology Import Export Corporation signed agreements to build luxury tourist hotels.
China has become a major trading partner. Sri Lankan exports to China rose from $59 million in 2009 to $80 million in 2010. During the same year, Chinese two-way trade with Sri Lanka rose to almost $2 billion and Chinese exports to Sri Lanka nearly doubled.
Another serious concern for the US, and also India, is that China is completing the construction of a large harbour at Hambantota in southern Sri Lanka, as part of its plans to have port facilities across the Indian Ocean to protect Chinese shipping routes.
Also irking Washington is the fact that the Sri Lankan government has close relations with Gaddafi’s regime in Libya. Rajapakse visited Libya twice during 2009, in April and September, obtaining a pledge of $500 million in financial assistance toward development projects. In January this year, Rajapakse’s son Namal, who is a member of parliament, met Gaddafi in Tripoli and invited him to visit Sri Lanka.
On March 5, Rajapakse’s media director, Bandula Jayasekera, issued a press release stating that Gaddafi had phoned the president. According to the statement, Rajapakse advised the Libyan dictator to “establish peace in Libya as soon as possible and safeguard the lives of Libyan people”. It was an ostentatious declaration of support for Gaddafi’s efforts to crush the opposition to his regime.
The Rajapakse government is desperate to avert even the hint of a war crimes probe. On February 23, a Sri Lankan delegation led by Attorney General Mohan Peiris and External Affairs Secretary Romesh Jayasinghe secretly met UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon and the UN panel advising him on war crime charges in Sri Lanka. The delegation urged the UN not to make an adverse report. Last year, the government declared the UN panel “unacceptable” and refused to cooperate with it.
The Colombo government has made no comment on Blake’s threat. It has expressed regret at, but not condemned, the US Senate resolution. In a further attempt to placate Washington, Rajapakse met with US ambassador Patricia Butenis on March 8. This is a signal that Rajapakse is seeking an accommodation with the Obama administration. He knows full well that the US government’s real concerns are not war crimes but its strategic and economic interests.
© WSWS
Thursday, March 17, 2011
Sri Lanka: NGOs face funding gap and Government scrutiny
Inter Press Service
.............................................................................................................................................................................................
British-government funded agencies and AusAid, an Australian government agency, have reportedly reduced their funding of local NGOs. U.S.-based Care International is also cutting its local staff in Colombo. Officials at these agencies could not be reached for comment.
"The government wants a hands-off policy from donors, and thus prefers countries like China which provides assistance without being too concerned [about other issues]," said Harim Peiris, a Colombo-based political analyst and a one-time spokesperson for former President Chandrika Kumaratunga. China is second to Japan as Sri Lanka’s largest lender of development assistance.
"There is a lot of downsizing [of staff]," a veteran aid worker here who declined to be identified told IPS. "I don’t have numbers but I can tell you that any NGO involved in governance, post-conflict peace or post-war trauma related work will have a problem with the authorities," who "not only track the work of such NGOs but also often visit their offices."
The most affected agencies are involved in governance, peace building, conflict-resolution and post-war trauma counselling. "Anything that is considered political or empowering people to establish their rights is anathema to the establishment," the aid worker said, adding that he is afraid to get exposed, as any NGO worker critical of the establishment will be "in trouble."
Nearly two years after the ruling United People’s Freedom Alliance (UPFA) ended the bloody insurgency by Tamil rebels demanding regional autonomy for their community, the government is still cagey about western-funded NGOs - particularly following criticism by human rights groups and civil society organisations regarding conduct of government forces during the last stages of the conflict.
Dozens of civilians were reported to have died in crossfire during the last stages of the conflict in May 2009, and rights groups say better government planning could have averted this. President Mahinda Rajapaksa and his ministers have repeatedly rejected claims of large-scale civilian casualties.
A meeting conducted in secret on Feb. 23 between a government team and a U.N. Panel advising Secretary General Ban Ki-moon on the Sri Lankan human rights situation illustrates Rajapaksa’s worry over alleged human rights violations. The meeting, which was held in New York and revealed by the influential Colombo-based Sunday Times newspaper, so far hasn’t been denied by the government.
J. Weliamuna, a well-known human rights lawyer and former director of Transparency International’s Colombo office, told IPS that the situation concerning NGOs is worsening. "The government sees everybody as a challenge and has a phobia against NGOs," he said, adding that the government views civil society as its only challenge since the opposition is weak.
© Inter Press Service
Thursday, March 17, 2011
Supreme Court to Decide on Sethusamudram Ship Channel Plan
By P. Manoj | Live Mint
.............................................................................................................................................................................................
The court is hearing plea filed by individuals and groups opposed to the project—which requires slicing through a reef between India and Sri Lanka that’s considered sacred and ecologically sensitive.
“Once the R.K. Pachauri committee submits its report and the Supreme Court allows the work to continue, a meeting of the public investment board and the Union cabinet will be held to approve the revised project cost of Rs.4,600 crore,” said one of the two shipping ministry officials mentioned earlier.
The earlier project cost of Rs.2,427.40 crore approved in 2005 has been fully utilized, necessitating a revised bill for the project, he added. Only about 40% of the total project work is completed. The near twofold rise in costs is mainly a result of higher dredging prices over the two years of delay in executing the project.
A second shipping ministry official confirmed the development. Both the officials did not want to be identified. A spokesperson for the shipping ministry declined to comment.
Billed as India’s Suez Canal, the Sethusamudram project is expected to reduce the sailing time between the country’s east and west coasts by as much as 30 hours, or 424 nautical miles, by creating a channel between the Indian mainland and Sri Lanka. A nautical mile is 1.82km.
Currently, ships have to endure a long detour around Sri Lanka due to the presence of a reef known as Adam’s Bridge, or Ram Sethu.
The Sethusamudram project involves boring a 167km long, 300m wide shipping lane connecting the Gulf of Mannar and Bay of Bengal via Palk Straits and Palk Bay, cutting through Adam’s Bridge.
Hindus consider the reef sacred. They believe Ram’s army built a bridge from near Rameswaram in Tamil Nadu to be able to reach Sri Lanka for an epic war. Environmentalists fear the project will destroy the sensitive ecology and marine life in the region.
Dredging in the Adam’s Bridge region had to be stopped following a Supreme Court order on 31 August and 14 September 2007 asking the government to set up an expert panel on the matter.
Work on the non-controversial Palk Straits region continued till July 2009.
The Centre set up a panel of experts headed by Pachauri, director general of The Energy and Resources Institute, a non-profit body working on sustainable energy, to consider an alternative alignment for the project. The panel is yet to submit its report. Pachauri did not respond to an email sent on 10 March seeking comments on the status of the work entrusted to the committee and a possible time frame for submitting the report.
The Sethusamudram project required dredging 82.5 million cu.m of sand and rocks from the sea bed. When the work was stopped in 2009, only 33.99 million cu.m had been dredged, but the cost was fully utilized. Dredging for the new lane started on 2 July 2005 and was to be completed in 180 weeks, or about 3.5 years.
Experts say the stoppage will undo the work already done.
“Whatever work has been done has been undone,” said G.Y.V. Victor, a certified dredge master and secretary general of the Eastern Dredging Association of India. “If and when the dredging work re-starts, it has to begin from scratch because the areas that were dug to create the new lane must have accumulated silt by now.”
© Livemint.com
Thursday, March 17, 2011
Sri Lanka: Young Tamils in Mannar and Jaffna still live in fear
By Melani Manel Perera | Asia News
.............................................................................................................................................................................................
"If the conflict really is over as described by the government – they continue – why are they still inspecting some areas, breaking into the homes of Tamil without notice and without giving any explanation?".
In many cases, the government seized the land in the High Security Zones (HSZ), offering alternative accommodation for families who lived there. This is the case of the Catholic villagers in Mullikkulam: "About 250 families, originally from the village - says a young man – have been scattered throughout the district. They were fishermen, farmers, ranchers and wealthy families. Now they are living like nomads but do not want to accept 'alternatives': they are determined to return to their lands. " Unofficial sources report that the government wants to build a naval base right in the village of Mullikkulam.
Another important issue is the lack of an effective program of assistance for war widows and their children. "Daily charity – says one young boy - can not be a solution."
Young people launch a final appeal: "Until we feel we are living in freedom, without any restriction, as our parents remember in their stories, we can not say we are doing well. What we should really feel is that we are truly part of this society. "
© Asia News
Thursday, March 17, 2011
Political rivalry behind Police arrest of Batticaloa journalist
Tamil Net
.............................................................................................................................................................................................
Civil sources said the arrest of the journalist is due to political rivalry.
The “Vaara Uraikal” magazine has been publishing news reports about alleged irregularities and corruption in development works carried out in the Batticaloa district by state agencies.
The journalist was attacked two years ago in 2009 by the ruling party supporters. His was house smashed by a group of armed men in 2010.
An armed gang led Deputy Minister M.L.A.M. Hisbullah had attacked the journalist in February and he was admitted in the Batticaloa Teaching Hospital.
Police have still not arrested the suspects even after their identities were revealed.
© Tamil Net
This site is best viewed with firefox
Visit the JDS New Website
Read the urgent alerts - act now!
Sri Lanka's Killing Fields
No Impunity for Enforced Disappearances
UN REPORT ON SRI LANKA
where is prageeth?
Amnesty: Failures of Sri Lanka's LLRC
Permanent Peopls's Tribunal on Sri Lanka - Final Report
Sivaram: A walk down memory lane
Remembering Lasantha
Subscribe to JDS newsfeeds
UN EXPERTS conclusion backs the JDS video
SL Execution Video : The truth comes out
A legacy unforgotten
Post-war justice in sri lanka : International Commission of Jurists
Evidence of Police Brutality in Sri Lanka
A Study of Police Torture in Sri Lanka
