Watchdog | Groundviews
.............................................................................................................................................................................................
The manner of these abductions has sent alarm bells ringing within the Sri Lankan human rights community, recalling the twin phenomena of the ‘white van’ and the unidentified gunman’ which plagued the country in the period from 1987/1989, and which prompted two visits to the island by the UN Working Group on Enforced and Involuntary Disappearances in 1991 and 1992.
The discovery of a charred body of a man on a small street in Narahenpita, Colombo 5, on the morning of February 13 has served to heighten these concerns. There have been 10 bodies discovered in February in addition to the 7 abductions and one missing person in Jaffna who was later found dead.
Among those abducted have been social activists, businessmen and those identified by the Police as criminals and ‘underworld’ characters. Labeling abducted persons as belonging to the underworld points to a disturbing new element of ‘social cleansing’, which is being used to garner public support for these killings and to divert attention from the fact that these abductions are an expression of the collapse of the rule of law in Sri Lanka.
The abduction and killing of individuals from the so-called underworld can be in some way linked to the public altercation between ruling party MP Duminda Silva and Presidential Advisor and former MP Bharatha Lakshman Premachandra, in which the latter was shot and killed. Some of those abducted, ‘disappeared’ and killed were linked to these two individuals and were either suspects or witnesses to the shooting, which took place on October 8 during campaigning for local government elections in Colombo.
Amongst others who have been abducted are those who have in any way challenged the authorities on issues of impunity and on-going human rights violations. Lalith Kumar Weeraraj and ‘Kugan’ Muruganandan, two political activists, were abducted in Jaffna on December 9, while engaged in preparations for celebrating Human Rights Day. On February 11, Ramasamy Prabaharan, a Tamil businessman was abducted in Colombo, two days before a fundamental rights case filed by him against the Police was due to be heard. Mr Prabaharan, who was released from prison in September 2011 after two years in detention without any charges being filed against him, was challenging this arbitrary detention and torture while in custody; he had received threats asking him to withdraw the case. On February 12, Chandrapala alias Mervyn, who had been brought to Colombo’s court complex in Hulftsdorf for a bail application, was abducted in the vicinity of the Courts while being accompanied by Prison Guards. A full list of the 32 abductions which have been reported in media is attached.
Most of the abductions have taken place in broad daylight, in the capital, Colombo, and in its suburbs. 4 are from Gampaha district, close to Colombo. All 3 missing cases and 3 of the abductions have taken place in the North, with 5 in Jaffna. Of the 32 abducted and gone missing. 7 bodies were found in public places; most of them bore marks of execution. One body was found on the east coast following abduction from the Western province. 5 persons have returned home. In many cases the Police investigations are inconclusive and pending. Out of the 32, one has been identified as a woman, two are not clear and 29 have been identified as men.
© Groundviews
Sunday, February 26, 2012
New wave of abductions and dead bodies in Sri Lanka
Sunday, February 26, 2012
Sri Lanka: Protest against 'Western conspiracy'
BBC Sinhala
.............................................................................................................................................................................................
Addressing a cabinet press briefing, a group of cabinet ministers described the recent protests against the fuel price increase as an “NGO funded conspiracy” which was supported by the West.
The conspiracy was clearly visible in Negombo and Chilaw while many other affected communities accepted the subsidy offered by the government, they said.
Housing Minister Wimal Weerawansa alleged that the Western powers are planning to prosecute President Rajapaksa and the “war heroes” in the international war crimes tribunal at The Hague.
Mass protests
"Is there a government in Sri Lanka that stays in power without holding elections? Is there a military rule in Sri Lanka ?" he questioned.
The ministers were commenting on the US-led moves to discuss the alleged war crimes in Sri Lanka at the upcoming United Nations Human Rights Council sessions in Geneva.
"Then what is this issue? It is very clear that the anger against the defeat of the LTTE behind all this," said Minister Weerawansa.
Power and Energy Minister Champika Ranawaka urged not to allow those who "try to create Maldives or Mid-East in Sri Lanka," at a time the rule of law has been established in the island.
"The UNP has said that whole villages disappeared during the war. Do they have evidence, whom do they by making these allegations," Minister Ranawaka questioned.
They called upon the public to stage mass protests on 27 February in the capital, Colombo, as well as in other cities, against the "Dollar, Yen, Pound funded" conspirators.
Acting Media Minister and Cabinet spokesman Lakshman Yapa Abeywardene, and Petroleum Minister Susil Premajayanth also took part in the press briefing.
© BBC Sinhala
Sunday, February 26, 2012
UK: Halt Deportations of Tamils to Sri Lanka
Human Rights Watch
.............................................................................................................................................................................................
In recent months the British government has sent Tamil asylum seekers back to Sri Lanka on charter flights. Human Rights Watch expressed particular concern about the next scheduled deportation from the United Kingdom of about 100 Tamil asylum seekers, scheduled for February 28, 2012.
“The British government has an international legal obligation not to deport people who have a credible fear of torture upon return,” said Brad Adams, Asia director at Human Rights Watch. “Convincing reports of arbitrary arrests and torture demand that the UK government suspend returns of rejected Tamil asylum seekers to Sri Lanka until it can fairly and thoroughly assess their individual claims based on up-to-date human rights information on Sri Lanka.”
Human Rights Watch has documented eight recent cases in which people deported to Sri Lanka have faced serious abuses. A Tamil deportee from the United Kingdom, RS (a pseudonym for security reasons), said that army soldiers in Sri Lanka arrested him on December 29, 2011. He alleged that during interrogation he was beaten with batons and burned with cigarettes, and that his head was doused with kerosene. He also said that his head was submerged in a bucket of water, that he was hung upside down, and that hot chilis were placed under his head and chest. He said that as a result of this torture, he confessed to being a member of the separatist Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE), which were defeated in May 2009. He said that he paid a substantial bribe to escape from detention, and fled back to the United Kingdom, where he has applied for asylum.
DB, a Tamil deported from the United Kingdom in 2011, said that he was arrested at a Sri Lankan army checkpoint on December 10. He alleged that he was forced to strip naked and burned with cigarettes and beaten until he agreed to sign a document in Sinhala. He said the soldiers told him he had to work as an informer for the army to identify former LTTE cadres. Like RS, he said he escaped detention after a family member paid a bribe for his release, then secured false documents to return to the United Kingdom, where he has again applied for asylum status.
Another 2011 deportee, AH, alleges that he was arrested by the police Criminal Investigation Department (CID) soon after arriving in Colombo, Sri Lanka’s capital. He said that he was stripped naked and was beaten and tortured until a family member paid a bribe for his release.
Human Rights Watch has also documented cases of Tamil deportees who alleged to have been subjected to rape as a form of torture upon their return to Sri Lanka. In December 2010, CB was arrested at the Colombo airport on his return and was detained for a month by the CID. He said that during this time he was beaten with metal rods and raped four or five times by two men. As he described it, one man would hold him down while the other raped him.
BK, a Tamil woman, alleges that she was arrested at Colombo airport by the CID on her return in April 2010 and kept in detention. She says was raped by several men many times during the course of her detention. She described profuse bleeding as a result of these rapes. Both CB and BK managed to secure their release after relatives intervened to bribe the officials holding them. Both fled Sri Lanka and are seeking asylum in the United Kingdom.
Human Rights Watch has obtained medical evidence supporting each of the above claims of torture.
Asylum tribunals in the United Kingdom have recently concluded that the lack of an official identification card is not a risk factor for returnees. However, in two cases returnees alleged that they were specifically targeted because they did not possess the required IDs.
At a parliamentary debate on Sri Lanka on February 22, Foreign and Commonwealth Office Minister Alexander Burt said: “We are aware of media allegations that returnees are being abused. All have been investigated by the high commission, and no evidence has been found to substantiate any of them.”
Human Rights Watch and others have learned that returnees are met at the Colombo airport by UK embassy staff and given a document with the contact information for the embassy. British officials have stated that they do not have the capacity to monitor the safety of returnees and that returnees may fear retaliation from the Sri Lankan government if they make contact with the UK embassy.
“The United Kingdom and other countries considering the claims of Tamil asylum seekers need to recognize the reality of what may await them on return,” Adams said. “Meeting returnees at the airport and giving them a phone number has not prevented them from being wrongfully arrested and mistreated. This should come as no surprise since abuses against Tamils suspected of links to the LTTE have long been recorded in official UK documents.”
The UK Border Agency’s Operational Guidance Note on Sri Lanka, last updated in December, acknowledges that torture is widespread in Sri Lanka: “The UN Committee Against Torture (UNCAT) stated that they remain seriously concerned about the continued and consistent allegations of widespread use of torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment of suspects in police custody, especially to extract confessions or information to be used in criminal proceedings. The Committee is further concerned at reports that suggest that torture and ill-treatment perpetrated by state actors, both the military and the police, have continued in many parts of the country after the conflict ended in May 2009 and is still occurring in 2011. In 2011 the UNCAT issued a scathing statement about Sri Lanka in which it called for an end to the practice.”
However, the Operational Guidance Note in section 5 on “Returns” makes no mention of Tamil ethnicity as a factor to consider.
The United Kingdom is a party to the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, which states in article 3 that no state “shall expel, return (‘refouler’) or extradite a person to another State where there are substantial grounds for believing that he would be in danger of being subjected to torture.” In making such determinations, the authorities “shall take into account all relevant considerations including, where applicable, the existence in the State concerned of a consistent pattern of gross, flagrant or mass violations of human rights.”
Human Rights Watch called for the Sri Lankan government to stop targeting Tamil returnees and end the use of torture and other ill-treatment in custody. Sri Lanka is also a party to the Convention against Torture.
“The Sri Lankan government has a long record of torture and mistreatment that has not ended with the end of the long war with the LTTE,” Adams said. “The government needs to take serious and public measures to end these cruel practices.”
© HRW
Sunday, February 26, 2012
8,000 killed in last year of Sri Lanka war: census
AFP | Yahoo! News
.............................................................................................................................................................................................
The figure is in stark contrast to estimates by international rights groups, which say up to 40,000 civilians perished in the final months of the civil war and have heavily criticised Sri Lanka's actions at the end of the conflict.
The 80-page census report said 11,172 people were reported dead in the former war zone in 2009, at the height of fighting between government forces and the separatist Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE), with only 2,523 due to natural causes.
It described 7,934 deaths as being due to "extraordinary circumstances", but did not identify those responsible or whether Tiger combatants were included in the statistics.
The cause of death was "not stated" in the balance of 715 deaths, the department said.
Colombo has long maintained that its military should not be held culpable for any civilian deaths during the fighting, blaming the Tigers for using non-combatants as human shields.
But last week the military appointed a five-member panel of senior army officers to probe allegations of war crimes by its own troops in the final phase of fighting.
The census department said the highest concentration of 2009 deaths was in Kilinochchi district, where the rebels had their de facto capital, and adjoining Mullaittivu, where the final battle was fought in May of that year.
The findings were based on a census carried out between June and August last year and were dated November 2011, but only released Saturday.
Sri Lanka's rights record is expected to be discussed at a UN Human Rights Council meeting opening in Geneva next week where the US has said it will bring a resolution demanding the island probe alleged war crimes by its troops.
The United Nations has estimated that up to 100,000 people died in the conflict between 1971 and 2009.
© AFP
Sunday, February 26, 2012
Sri Lanka: Unslayable ghosts
The Economist
.............................................................................................................................................................................................
So argues Gotabaya Rajapaksa, Sri Lanka’s defiant and powerful defence secretary (and brother to the president, Mahinda Rajapaksa). But for the first time since the end of the war in 2009, the Sri Lankan government may be forced to answer for its actions to the United Nations’ human-rights council. This week, a Sri Lankan delegation arrived in Geneva, for a council session starting on February 27th. America (with European support) is expected to propose a resolution, calling for the government to report on both how it is fostering better ties with Tamils and its inquiries into possible war crimes.
At the moment, the government is unrepentant. “Go by the facts”, advises Mr Rajapaksa. “Nobody can categorise [the crushing of the separatist rebel army which itself had committed atrocities] as a genocide.” He dismisses televised footage of Sri Lankan soldiers executing several naked prisoners as a fake (see picture). Briefly angry, he dares any relative who recognises a victim to speak out: “Bring me any person.” Did he order civilians or prisoners killed? “Nobody can say zero [deaths occurred], but there was no policy.”
The Rajapaksa defence will be repeated at length in the coming months. The terms of the dispute will probably be determined by a government-backed inquiry into the war’s end, called the Lessons Learned and Reconciliation Commission (LLRC). Mr Rajapaksa says some LLRC proposals may have merit. He promises, for example, “military boards” to look into its timid suggestions of army wrongdoing. But the expected Western-backed proposal may also try to use the LLRC to put pressure on the government by asking for other recommendations to be implemented. These include liberal things like letting the national anthem be sung in Tamil (as well as Sinhala), ensuring press freedom, reducing the clout of the army, putting the police under civilian control, cracking down on paramilitary groups that harass Tamils, resolving land disputes and asking if at least individual soldiers committed crimes.
Outsiders need to speak up, since many locals seem increasingly cowed. “The fear psychosis is more than before,” laments Mangala Samaraweera, an ex-foreign minister who defected to the opposition. One critic describes in bitter detail how a relative was recently shot dead by a close ally of the defence secretary, while out campaigning. The past few months have seen cases of abduction, torture and disappearance at the hands of thugs travelling in white vans.
Official claims of peace and freedom hardly ring true, at least among Tamils. Some of them talk of occupation. R. Sampanthan, an ageing leader of the Tamil National Alliance, scoffs at suggestions of ethnic reconciliation and claims that mass graves are hidden in “high-security zones” in the north. Testimony from mothers and widows in the north-east leads him to believe that government soldiers killed 10,000 opponents at the end of (or even after) the war. Over 1,000 Tamil fighters who surrendered are missing, he says.
Sri Lanka’s stance is that the rights council in Geneva has no business poking its nose into this. Along with a motley club of Cuba, Pakistan, Russia, Algeria and China it is backing a counter-resolution criticising Western funding of the council. Another presidential brother and leading minister, Basil Rajapaksa, claims that it is the outsiders who are causing tension. He says criticism “has made us more nervous. If we were not pressurised we would do more than this” for reconciliation.
Americans and Europeans think the opposite is true. Sri Lanka undertook its LLRC inquiry partly because an investigation was being launched by the UN secretary-general, Ban Ki-moon. Many moderates, even in government, want friendlier ties with Europe—still easily the island’s biggest trading partner—and the West generally. Warm relations with India, too, rest in part on reconciliation with the Tamils. Even the Rajapaksas are anxious that next year’s Commonwealth heads of government meeting, in Colombo, should not be overwhelmed by a row over abuses. Maybe a tacit deal is possible: if the Rajapaksas show proper reconciliation efforts and beef up democracy, outsiders may talk less about the horrors at the end of the war.
© The Economist
Thursday, February 23, 2012
Marie Colvin: A mediator in white flag killings
By Matthew Russell Lee | Inner City Press
.............................................................................................................................................................................................
Also involved were UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon's chief of staff Vijay Nambiar, who conveyed assurances of safety but refused to go witness the surrenders, and Shavendra Silva, a Sri Lankan General since made Deputy Permanent Representative and, unless it is stopped, a UN Senior Adviser on Peacekeeping Operations.
Imagine what Ms. Colvin would think. But what will others now do? Consider:
Marie Colvin, a reporter with The Times of London, wrote that on Monday, May 18, 2009, at 5:30 a.m. she personally called Nambiar in Colombo to relay a message she had received from members of the LTTE leadership, who were surrounded in a bunker with 300 loyalists including women and children, that they were ready to give themselves up to Sri Lankan government troops. According to Colvin the leaders wanted “Nambiar to be present to guarantee the Tigers’ safety”.
Nambiar told Colvin that he had been assured by Sri Lankan president Mahinda Rajapaksa that those who gave up would be safe if they were to “hoist a white flag high”. When Colvin suggested that Nambiar go personally to witness the surrender he told her it would not “be necessary” and that “the president’s assurances were enough”. Hours later the lifeless bodies of dozens of members of the LTTE leadership including the two men who told Colvin they were ready to give up, were put on display
The UN's gloss on the incident is in Paragraphs 170 and 171 of Ban's Panel of Experts report on Sri Lanka, which names Silva as well as the Permanent Representative who may as a a "fix" replace him, Palitha Kohona.
Twenty six days ago Inner City Press began asking the UN and then various countries' missions to the UN how they could accept as a UN "Senior Adviser on Peacekeeping Operations" General Shavendra Silva, whose Division 58 is repeatedly named in connection with war crimes in Secretary General Ban Ki-moon's Panel of Experts report on Sri Lanka.
Now, with no credit to the UN Secretariat of Ban Ki-moon, multiple Ambassadors have told Inner City Press that there is a "fix."
"It's very simple," a well placed Permanent Representative told Inner City Press on Tuesday morning in front of the Security Council. "We can do one thing. When we created this [Senior Advisory Group], we insisted the membership must be a PR [Permanent Representative] level. Wherever it isn't will not be welcome this time. Palitha [Kohona] will have to come himself, he cannot nominate anyone. That's their choice."
Inner City Press had predicted this semi-solution weeks ago but Sri Lanka Permanent Representative Palitha Kohona, who also appears by name in the Panel of Experts report in connection surrenderees who were killed, said that he would not switch with Silva.
The outrage of Silva's nomination, which Sri Lanka got through the Asia Group not by election but by getting Nepal and Saudi Arabia to withdraw, has spread to other regional groups and major member states.
Also on Tuesday morning, Inner City Press asked UK Permanent Representative Mark Lyall Grant about l'affaire Silva. He said "there has been a lot of discussion" between the UN Secretariat and others -- he mentioned "the Americans," whose Ambassador Rice told Inner City Press of US concern back on February 17 -- but added that "the Secretariat says they can't do anything."
This position, with which even UN High Commissioner on Human Rights Navi Pillay disagrees, as she told Inner City Press in response to a question after she briefed the General Assembly about Syria on February 13, was reiterated by Ban's spokesman Martin Nesirky at Tuesday's noon briefing.
Inner City Press noted that Ban was in effect disagreeing with Pillay, who wrote to him to say that the same vetting applied to UN peacekeepers should apply to a Senior Adviser on Peacekeeping Operations. Nesirky said it's up to member states, you are putting words in my mouth and I think I'll leave it at that." [Both Ban and Nesirky have now left town for a week.]
Inner City Press had asked if the Secretariat had any role in the "fix;" Nesikry said "that's a very very long question," the "answer is very short: this is a decision that was taken by the Asia Group member states, it is for the member states to decide."
This stands in contrast to instances when Ban Ki-moon urges the member states on the Security Council to reach consensus and take action, and expresses regret when they do not. Is having an alleged war criminal from Sri Lanka as a UN adviser just not of as much concern to Ban Ki-moon?
Prior to these developments, the Sri Lankan Mission's action was to send a letter of complaint to Inner City Press, sending a copy to Ban's spokesman Martin Nesirky as well as to some in the UN press corps.
Inner City Press in less than 24 hours published and responded to the letter, citing only some of the many references to Silva's Division 58 in the report.
Now that's updated, and Silva is blaming his problems on the Press. How about the deeds, of May 2009 and before?
© Inner City Press
Thursday, February 23, 2012
UN committee bars Sri Lankan general linked to atrocities
AFP | Google news
.............................................................................................................................................................................................
But Major General Shavendra Silva still attended the first meeting of the advisory panel to UN leader Ban Ki-moon. Silva sat in the room but did not speak, no other member spoke to him and no documents were given to him, diplomats said.
The nomination of Silva, Sri Lanka's deputy UN ambassador, to the panel by Asia-Pacific countries at the UN set off a storm of protest by rights groups. A Canadian official who chairs the special advisory group said that Silva's presence was "not appropriate."
Silva has been accused of playing a central role in the Sri Lankan military's crushing of a Tamil separatist uprising in 2009 in which tens of thousands of people died, according to UN experts and rights groups.
"Following careful consideration and consultation with other special advisory group members, the chair, Louise Frechette, has advised Major General Shavendra Silva of Sri Lanka, that his participation is not appropriate or helpful for the purposes of this group," said a statement released by Frechette.
"He will not participate in its deliberations," added Frechette, a former UN deputy secretary general and top Canadian diplomat who was named by Ban to chair the committee.
"If Frechette had not acted this panel would just have fallen apart, nobody wanted him on the panel," said one diplomat, speaking on condition of anonymity.
Silva has not faced any charges over his role in the military campaign. But a UN panel which investigated the Sri Lankan military campaign referred to the army's 58th division which he led at the time.
UN human rights chief Navi Pillay said she was "deeply concerned at the impact" of Silva's nomination on the credibility of UN peacekeeping, in a letter sent to Ban Ki-moon and other UN leaders, which was obtained by AFP.
Pillay said in the letter there was "a reasonable conclusion that there is, at the very least, the appearance of a case of international crimes to answer by Mr. Silva."
"We keep a list of individuals who are suspected of committing human rights violations and I have addressed a letter of concern to the secretary-general about this individual," Pillay told reporters last week.
The peacekeeping panel was set up to fix payments to countries that contribute troops to UN missions. It has 10 members, half named by Ban and half nominated by regional groups.
The UN secretariat had previously said it could do nothing about Silva's appointment as it was decided by member countries.
Neither Silva nor Sri Lanka's UN mission made an immediate comment on the action.
But Human Rights Watch strongly welcomed Frechette's move. It said Silva had been given "a stinging rebuke" and called on all UN member states to back what it called Frechette's "principled stand".
"General Silva should stop showing up at these meetings and understand that he is no longer welcome. The Sri Lankan government should realize that it will be marginalized for as long as it fails to take seriously allegations of massive wartime abuses, including by troops under General Silva's command," Human Rights Watch said in a statement.
Two Sri Lankan Tamils who alleged their relatives had been tortured filed a civil lawsuit in New York against Silva last month. But it was dismissed when he invoked diplomatic privilege.
© AFP
Thursday, February 23, 2012
Marie Colvin : A passion for speaking the truth
By Ian Birrell | Mail Online
.............................................................................................................................................................................................
It was like a scene from a futuristic thriller, with the mood that unpredictable fusion of passion, bravery and fear that drove last year’s revolutions in north Africa.
As I left the pandemonium of Tahrir Square in Egypt’s capital, I was not surprised to bump into the familiar figure of a woman with an American accent and a distinctive eye-patch.
Despite the lateness of the hour, Marie Colvin was out doing what she had done with such brilliance and bravery for so many years: Reporting from the frontline of the world’s hottest spots.
We went for a coffee, having not seen each other since the liberation of Tripoli four months earlier. I had just arrived that night, so she brought me up to speed with events in Egypt then, with typical generosity, let me sit in on an interview she had spent some time setting up with a leading human rights activist.
Afterwards, I returned to the fray and we agreed to meet the following day.
Somehow, we never did – and now that night in December was the last time I saw her. Yesterday brought the dreadful news that this gutsy and inspirational woman, one of the world’s great war reporters, was killed in the shelling of a media centre in Homs in Syria.
It was somehow symbolic that having dodged so many bullets in her lifetime, she finally met her end in the hell that is Homs.
For there she was in the most dangerous city in the most volatile region of the world – a region she had reported on with such skill, dedication and determination for more than two decades – as it was pounded and pulverised day and night by the murderous forces of Syria’s leader, Bashar al-Assad.
She was where she always wanted to be: In the heat of the action at the heart of the big global story.
Her last published story is a fitting tribute to her work: Under the headline ‘We live in fear of a massacre’, it is powerful, compassionate and colourful reportage that brings home vividly what it is like for those unfortunates trapped in the horror of Homs.
Her sympathies were always with the victims of violence.
And at a time when journalism in Britain is under such assault, her tragic and untimely death at the age of 55 reminds us of its real role and irreplaceable value.
‘Our mission is to speak truth to power,’ she once said. ‘We send home that first rough draft of history.’
Colvin risked her life to go to those places torn apart by chaos, destruction and depravity in order to bear witness to brutal events and try to establish through ‘the sandstorm of propaganda’ the causes of conflict. ‘We can and do make a difference in exposing the horrors of war and the atrocities that befall civilians,’ she said.
Now she has paid the ultimate price.
Just like David Blundy, the man who recruited her to the Sunday Times (the same year that I joined the paper as a nervous young reporter) and who was killed two years later in El Salvador. Just like the photographer Tim Hetherington, blown to death in Libya last year. Just like ITN reporter Terry Lloyd, shot dead in the Iraq war. And just like at least 46 other journalists killed worldwide last year.
This roll-call of reporters slain for doing their job should be remembered amid the current furore over the future of the Press – not least since Marie Colvin was funded on her foreign news-gathering by the much-maligned Rupert Murdoch.
Reporting from the world’s most dangerous places does not come cheap with all those flights, fixers, flak jackets and satellite phones.
Sometimes journalists have gone too far in pursuit of trivia and tittle-tattle. But sometimes they go much further in pursuit of the biggest stories on the planet, taking the most extreme risks. This should be remembered by all those politicians who yesterday paid such fulsome tributes to Colvin’s courage from the sanctity of Westminster.
But Colvin should not be mythologised. She may have been unbelievably brave but she was far from fearless.
She knew the savagery to which mankind can stoop, having seen too much blood spilt around the globe and having herself lost an eye to shrapnel in Sri Lanka while investigating government oppression of Tamil civilians in 2001. Indeed, she confided to friends doubts over what proved to be her final assignment.
She was a complex character, fiercely competitive and intensely driven in search of the story yet always friendly to rivals and helpful to young reporters. Like many in her game, underneath the New Yorker’s tough exterior was someone kind and caring.
She once said the real difficulty was not going to places where people were shooting at you but having enough faith in humanity to believe that enough people would care when your reports from such places were printed.
As her editor and friend John Witherow said yesterday, she was a woman with wit and tremendous joie de vie, able to charm even the likes of Colonel Gaddafi – who once confessed to her his love for Madeline Albright, the U.S. secretary of state.
She loved sailing on the Thames and had a wide circle of friends, who have spent years fearing the news that made headlines round the world yesterday.
She liked to do things her own way: When a smoking ban came into force at the Sunday Times, she blithely turned up with three packets of cigarettes and puffed away at her desk; typically, no one dared stop her.
A technophobe, she would implore colleagues to help send copy back to her editors. She once ran up a bill of £25,000 when failing to switch off a satellite phone after making a call to London.
Another time, she claimed on expenses for expensive underwear stolen in East Timor – later telling Vogue in an interview that such items were essential for a woman in a war zone.
With her in Homs was the photographer Paul Conroy, a tough ex-soldier injured in the attack. We became good friends sharing a hotel room for a fortnight with three others in Libya last year, laughing late into the night over cherished cups of coffee like a group of students in our increasingly squalid room.
Another member of the quintet was a young American photographer named Michael Brown. As we drove at high-speeds into Libya last summer, he showed me pictures on his iPhone of hideous holes in his body after he was strafed by shrapnel in the grenade attack that killed Hetherington a few months earlier.
That incident took place in Misrata in north-eastern Libya, until now the scene of probably the most savage fighting since the wave of uprisings began in the region last year. Two reporters died there and six more were injured. Such was the chaos, many journalists reported from a ship anchored off the shore or fled after a few days – but not Colvin and Conroy.
Their driver was killed and the duo narrowly escaped with their lives when an ambulance they were in was attacked on the way to the frontline. Demonstrating once again her courage, Colvin refused to leave with other journalists aboard the last ship sent in to rescue stranded foreigners and Libyan women and children. She stayed another six weeks.
Colvin would be the first to remind us she was just one among dozens of people killed yesterday in Homs. Poignantly, she once wrote how she was always awed by the ‘quiet bravery of civilians who endure far more than I ever will. They must stay where they are; I can come home to London’.
Even more poignant was one of the last messages she posted on Facebook. ‘I think reports of my survival may be exaggerated,’ she wrote. ‘In Baba Amr. Sickening, cannot understand how the world can stand by and I should be hardened by now.’
Marie Colvin never stood by when ordinary people were being murdered and maimed. Her death is a terrible tragedy. But the ultimate tragedy would be if others failed to follow in her footsteps to report on the savagery of war with such an honest, unflinching gaze.
© Mail Online
Thursday, February 23, 2012
Senior Chinese military official meets with Sri Lankan guests
PLA Daily | Defence Professionals
.............................................................................................................................................................................................
Ma Xiaotian said that China and Sri Lanka have enjoyed deep traditional friendship and the solid foundation of the China-Sri Lanka relationship jointly laid by the elder generation of leaders of the two countries. Since the establishment of diplomatic relations 55 years ago, the bilateral relationship has maintained healthy and smooth development. The two militaries also enjoy friendly relations and have conducted pragmatic cooperation in various fields. The Chinese side feels happy that Sri Lanka has ended the war and been on the way towards stability and prosperity. In the future, China is ready to further promote relations between the two countries and the two militaries and continue to do its best to support the Sri Lankan army building.
Collenberg said that China and Sri Lanka are traditionally friendly neighbors. The Sri Lankan side appreciates China’s support for safeguarding its national sovereignty and territorial integrity, highly values its military relations with China, and is willing to work together with the Chinese side to promote China-Sri Lanka military ties to a new high.
Guan Youfei, deputy director of the Foreign Affairs Office of the Ministry of National Defense of China, and Vinosuria, Sri Lankan defense attach, among others, were present at the meeting.
© Defpro News
Thursday, February 23, 2012
Sri Lanka: Calls mount for government action on war inquiry
IRIN
.............................................................................................................................................................................................
International human rights groups and, until recently, several governments, including the UK, US and Australia, widely criticized the lack of accountability in the report by the Lessons Learnt and Reconciliation Commission (LLRC).
The commission set out in May 2010 to investigate the final phase of fighting between 2002 and May 2009, when the government declared victory over the separatist Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam.
Critics called for an independent inquiry, denouncing the report for ignoring alleged human rights abuses, an issue also raised in the Report of the UN Secretary-General's Panel of Experts on Accountability in Sri Lanka.
But weeks before the next UN Human Rights Council session in Geneva and nearly three months after the LLRC submitted its final report to the president on 20 November 2011, the US is calling for a resolution to prod Sri Lanka's government to act on the recommendations.
"While it has shortcomings on accountability, the commission addressed a number of crucial areas of concern to Sri Lankans and made substantive recommendations on reconciliation," said US Assistant Secretary Robert Blake at a recent meeting in Colombo.
Where to start
Jehan Perera, executive director of the Colombo-based National Peace Council, told IRIN he felt the release of a full list of detainees in government custody was the most important and "easiest to implement" of the dozens of recommendations.
Thousands of prisoners who went missing during the war remain unaccounted for, some of whom have been missing for more than two decades, he added. "If such a list were out, it would bring closure to a lot of families."
Ruki Fernando, head of the human rights in conflict programme at the local NGO, Law and Society Trust (LST), picked a day of commemoration for those who lost their lives. "A number of recommendations by the LLRC have the potential to build trust amongst communities," he said.
Other provisions he highlighted include the de-militarization and establishment of full civilian administration in the former conflict hotspot northern region; financial compensation for all survivors, or those who lost lives, limbs and possibly also property, according to the report; addressing disappearances; ensuring access to places of religious worship, including those in high security zones; and the use of both Sinhala and Tamil - the respective major languages for the former warring sides - for the national anthem.
Assistant Secretary Blake said the LLRC recommendations on devolution of authority, demilitarization, rule of law, media freedom, disappearances and human rights violations and abuses, "if implemented, could contribute to genuine reconciliation and strengthening democratic institutions and practices".
Game changer
Attention is shifting from forcing an international investigation to encouraging implementation of the recommendations because they are, at least, a starting point for reconciliation, say local activists.
The longstanding problem, said LST's Fernando, was that the Sri Lankan government had steadfastly refused to cooperate with any international mechanism to move past war.
"The report offers an opportunity to move forward. Now it is up to the government to show it is committed to do that," said Perera.
But Fernando was pessimistic.
"Looking at the scorecard after the LLRC report is not encouraging - there have been at least 22 abductions reported after the LLRC report [was released]; bodies are found in Colombo; peaceful campaigns [to locate the missing] in the north were obstructed in December and January; a protester was killed and others injured even last week in Chilaw [North Western Province)," he said.
Army inquiry
Two days after the US expressed its support for a resolution, the national army announced its appointment of a five-member panel to investigate whether troops executed prisoners and killed civilians during the final phase of fighting.
Human Rights Watch criticized the panel as a "transparent ploy to deflect a global push for a genuine international investigation, not a sudden inspiration nearly three years after the war".
The Attorney-General has also announced it is conducting follow-up interviews with witnesses who provided LLRC testimony to gather more information for further examination.
The UN Human Rights Council session is scheduled for 27 February to 23 March.
© IRIN
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
