By Kaleb Warnock | Iowa State Daily
.............................................................................................................................................................................................
"I stand here today as a political asylum as a Sri Lankan journalist," said Jayantha through a translator. "I was forced to leave Sri Lanka to save my life. There are so many other journalists who live there in fear. Most of them are living in exile."
In his presentation, Jayantha told a room full of future journalists of the role and influence of media in Sri Lanka and how the struggle has caused extreme censorship of the media. He speaks primarily on behalf of the Tamil minority against the human rights violations enacted during the civil war between the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam and the Sri Lankan government.
The government tightened restrictions on the media following the end of the civil war in 2009, according to the Human Rights Watch report of 2010.
"As pressure mounted for an independent investigation into alleged laws of war violations," the report said, "the government responded by threatening journalists and civil society activists, effectively curtailing public debate and establishing its own commission of inquiry with a severely limited mandate."
Many of the threats were realized, Jayantha said.
"The first shots after the war was over were fired at the journalists and free media," Jayantha said. "They virtually crushed the free media institutions, and they only have the pro-government media to assassinate the character of the people who oppose them, or they actually use death squads to kill them."
As a matter of fact, Jayantha was the victim of a death squad, and he suspects they were motivated to silence him for speaking out against human rights violations.
"I was tortured and my left leg was broken," he said. "And today I'm walking with the assistance of steel rod that has been placed there. They poured acid on me. They also cut my beard and hair and put it in my mouth and forced me to inhale, which caused severe problems in my lungs subsequently. They thew my unconscious body in a ditch and left me to die."
Following the June 2009 attack, he was in the hospital for nearly a month and was unable to walk for six more. His case is not an exception, as many other journalists have been attacked and several have paid the ultimate price.
Jayantha said since this administration took over in 2005, five leading media institutions have been burned down, 35 media employees have been murdered and six journalists have been kidnapped. Five have been released due to public opposition, but one is still missing and has been since January of 2010.
There has been no ensuing investigation to many of these cases, including Jayantha's, and his attack remains unsolved.
"Every atrocity committed against a journalist and the media since April 20, 2005, to Dec. 8, 2009, the day that an editor of a newspaper was murdered, is being gradually covered by the dust that invaded through time," Jayantha said.
However, he continues to speak out against the Sri Lankan government and hopes to continue to fight for human rights in his home country. He called on journalists and the international community to fight for free speech and seek the truth and hold the government accountable for its actions.
"That's why I'm appealing to journalists. ... Don't let this freedom die."
© Iowa State Daily
Tuesday, April 12, 2011
Sri Lankan journalist speaks of attacks on media
Tuesday, April 12, 2011
UN served a ploy to surrender killings
Tamil Net
.............................................................................................................................................................................................
The UN worker who was present at Vavuniyaa during the last days of Vanni war has revealed to TamilNet Monday morning that he and his fellow officials who were present there were informed by the UN hierarchy in Colombo to do necessary preparations to monitor safe arrival of LTTE Political Head B. Nadesan and at least 9 others who were promised by Government of Sri Lanka (GoSL) safety with the assistance of the UN and the ICRC.
The UN officers at Vavuniyaa were instructed to do necessary preparations confidentially without leaking the information to media at that time.
A few days in advance, two UN Protection Unit officers were posted to Vavuniyaa from Colombo and they were allowed to proceed to Oamanthai while no other UN or INGO officials were allowed to pass beyond Thaa'ndikku'lam, the former UN worker further told TamilNet, adding that he was prepared to witness at any international investigations.
© Tamil Net
Tuesday, April 12, 2011
World Cup leaves Sri Lanka with $23 mln debt
AFP | Yahoo! News
.............................................................................................................................................................................................
"We spent a lot of money to host the World Cup, to build two stadiums and rebuild one stadium. The World Cup left us a 2.5 billion rupee ($22.6 million) deficit," Sports Minister Mahindananda Aluthgamage told reporters.
Sri Lanka, which lost the final to India by six wickets, hosted 12 matches during the World Cup, with others held in India and Bangladesh.
The island built two new grounds in the southern town of Hambantota and the central town of Pallekele, while nearly $8 million was spent to renovate the Colombo-based R. Premadasa stadium.
"We spent about five billion rupees ($45.3 million dollars) to build the three World Cup venues," Aluthgamage said.
The minister said the governing body was forced to pledge the newly built stadiums, along with income from upcoming tours, as collateral to raise funds to pay for the lavish tournament that ended on April 2.
"We are not in a serious cash crisis," Aluthgamage said. "Building new stadiums costs a lot of money. You must look at it as an investment for the future development of the game."
Sri Lanka Cricket treasurer Sujeewa Rajapakse said the board took a $21.5 million loan from state-run Bank of Ceylon and another $3.5 million loan from the International Cricket Council (ICC) to tide them over the shortfall.
"We are expecting $25 million from the ICC soon, by way of hosting rights. Once that comes, we can sort things out," Rajapakse said.
Sri Lanka is to face England, Australia, Pakistan and South Africa this year, and is also due to host the World Twenty20 championships in 2012.
Sri Lanka won its sole World Cup in 1996 and emerged finalists in 2007.
Since losing the final to India, the team's captain, vice-captain and selectors have quit, while head coach Australian-born Trevor Bayliss also ended his contract to take up his old job at New South Wales.
© Yahoo! News
Tuesday, April 12, 2011
Nepotism rampant in Rajapaksa government
Sutirtho Patranobis | Hindustan Times
.............................................................................................................................................................................................
"Independent observers generally characterized the presidential and parliamentary elections as problematic. Both elections were fraught with violations of the election law by all major parties and were influenced by the governing coalition’s massive use of state resources," the report said, adding that there were instances in which elements of the security forces acted independently of the civilian government.
There was no immediate reaction from either Rajapaksa’s office or the ministry of external affairs.
The report criticised the government’s human rights record in the post-war era, though adding that disappearances had gone down. "The government and its agents continued to be responsible for serious human rights problems. Security forces committed arbitrary and unlawful killings, although the number of extrajudicial killings declined. Disappearances continued to be a problem, although the total also declined. Many independent observers cited a continued climate of fear among minority populations, in large part based on past incidents," the state department report said.
Official impunity remains a problem too, according to the report. "There were no public indications or reports that civilian or military courts convicted any military or police members for human rights abuses. The government established a post-war Lessons Learnt and Reconciliation Commission (LLRC). Denial of fair public trial remained a problem; the judiciary was subject to executive influence; and the government infringed on citizens’ privacy rights."
The report said that there has been no progress in investigations into the killing of Sunday Leader editor, Lasantha Wickrematunga and the disappearance of LankaeNews journalist Prageeth Eknaligoda.
Wickrematunga was shot dead in Colombo on 8 January 2009, Eknaligoda is missing since he left office on 24 January, 2010. “Witnesses reported similarities in the manner in which this attack was carried out and the January 2009 attack on MTV/MBC studios, and some local groups suspected ministry of defense personnel were behind the attack,” it said.
© Hindustan Times
Tuesday, April 12, 2011
UK 'linked' Fonseka to Lasantha killing
BBC Sinhala
.............................................................................................................................................................................................
Lasantha Wickrametunga was shot dead in Colombo on 08 January, 2009. The attackers were never caught.
In a posthumously published editorial attributed to Lasantha he said, "When finally I am killed, it will be the government that kills me."
Prof. Rajiva Wijesinha, a ruling party MP, told BBC Sinhala service that the defence attaché of the British High Commission (BHC) in Colombo "gave a note" that accused then Gen Fonseka of being responsible for the assassination.
But the British authorities have neither denied nor confirmed Prof Wijesinha’s statement.
UK 'favoured' Fonseka
A spokesperson at the BHC in Colombo told BBC Sinhala service: "The British High Commission in Colombo would willingly share with the Sri Lankan authorities any evidence it obtained that shed any light on the assassination of the Sunday Leader Editor.”
Gen Fonseka, commander of the Sri Lanka army under President Mahinda Rajapaksa, during the was later selected as the common presidential candidate by the major opposition parties against Mr Rajapaksa.
"When the election came they (the British HC) took his side and did not provide us with the information," Prof Wijesinha told BBC Sandeshaya.
But the UK authorities have denied having favoured Gen Fonseka at January 2010 presidential elections.
“The UK Government remains impartial during elections in other countries. We did not favour any candidate in the Presidential Elections in Sri Lanka in 2009,” the BHC spokesperson said.
The US State Department report says that there has been no progress in investigations into the killing of Sunday Leader editor, Lasantha Wickrematunga and the disappearance of LankaeNews journalist Prageeth Ekneligoda.
In response Prof. Wijesinghe admitted that "it is necessary" to properly investigate the assassination but there was what he called a danger of government being accused of "political victimisation" if they pursue the case against Mr Fonseka.
Following a controversial military trial the former military chief is currently serving a jail term for irregularities in military procurements.
"But of course we shouldn't stop investigations just because we will be accused of political victimisations," said Prof. Wijesinghe.
The opposition has described the imprisonment of Gen Fonseka, who challenged President Mahinda Rajapaksa in the April 2010 presidential elections, as a political move.
Prof Wijesinha was the former secretary to the ministry of human rights before being appointed as a national list MP, after April 2010 elections, by the president.
He also admitted that there has been no progress in investigations over the disappearance of LankaeNews journalist Prageeth Ekneligoda.
"I think it is mistake from our part that there has been no investigation, of course we must investigate these incidents."
© BBC Sinhala
Thursday, April 07, 2011
Three chapters on Rajapaksa in Sri Lanka's new Mahavasma
PTI | MSN News
.............................................................................................................................................................................................
The Mahavamsa or The Great Chronicle describes the Sri Lankan history from the coming of Vijaya in 543 BC to the reign of King Mahasena (6th Century BC to 4th Century AD). A companion volume, the Culavamsa or Choolavansha ("lesser chronicle"), covers the period from the 4th century to the British takeover of Sri Lanka in 1815.
"A panel of eminent writers have begun the work on the sixth volume. This will cover the period between 1978 and 2010," Wimal Rubasinghe, the secretary to the ministry, said.
The ministry has decided to dedicated three chapters to Rajapaksa as opposed to his predecessors whose periods will be limited to two chapters or less.
"Rajapaksa''s achievement in ending the Island''s 30-year separatist war has no parallels in the chronicle," the official said.
© MSN News
Wednesday, April 06, 2011
Prageeth : Missing without trace
By Charlotte Jansen | The Art Journal
.............................................................................................................................................................................................
The Sri Lanka government has come under fire for not issuing a thorough investigation into Prageeth's disappearance, and it is widely speculated that he was abducted for political reasons - his cartoons were critical of the government, aligning more with the views of the opposition party the JVP. The Sri Lankan government has a long history of media harassment, indeed Prageeth had been abducted and released previous to his disappearance last year. Dozens of Sri Lankan journalists are now living in exile.
Prageeth's drawings have a laconic kind of beauty; perhaps it's projecting what I know onto what I see, and is therefore being too reductive in doing so, but they seem to be full of sadness of being restrained, at unable to explore his own boundaries as an artist.
Because of this devastating story, Sandya Eknaligoda finds herself now catapaulted into the spotlight of the Sri Lankan media. She was just recovering from illness when I contacted her via the group Journalists For Democracy in Sri Lanka, and she had to painstakingly translate her answers from Sinhala, but I eventually received these fascinating insights into Prageeth's life and work.
How did Prageeth begin working as a political cartoonist?
At the beginning, Prageeth worked as a graphic artist in a advertising firm. Then he started working for magazines and journals. While he was producing cartoons and art he continued to engage to engage in writing on daily basis. He has produced many journalistic pieces and some have been published posthumously. In 1994 Prageeth joined Lake House, a government-owned leading newspaper establishment, as a cartoonist and worked therein for sometime. In 2006 Prageeth joined Lanka e-news. Prageeth is a person with many talents – he was painting and making sculptures too.
What do you find most important about his work?
I mostly appreciate character of Prageeth: the man who lived inside him. To me there are two prominent characteristics in him: 1) kindness and love for the people; he even look back with compassion on the people who intimidated and dispossessed him. 2) sharp cosmopolitan thinking and straightforwardness in action. He possessed a very good power of memory entwined with clarity. Mostly he was with the capacity to convince the other. He is special.
What inspired Prageeth?
His love for democratic practices and ideas is immense. I am saying this because he drew cartoons mostly during the period of democracy at peril in Sri Lanka. For instance, during the period covering 1987 - 1989 he was endangering himself by providing casting a veil over so many personalities who were facing the witch-hunt of the government then in power.
How did his work continue under the Rajapakse regime?
When Rajapakse regime started to bury democratic practices and norms systematically, when it started to treat the ethnic issue in hegemonic manner, Prageeth started to express his vehement opposition. He believed that democratic federal solution is the only way to resolve ethnic crisis in the North and East provinces. When the war and brutal killing started in North and East in 2008, he was openly saying that chemical weapons were using against the Tamil people and he has found evidence to prove it.
What do you believe was the most powerful thing about his work?
In 2009, Prageeth was kidnapped by a group of undercover people who came in a white van; but he was released on the following day. He was bold enough to write about this torturous drama in detail and publish. it Knowing that his phone lines were tapped, and that he was bring followed by plain-clothed policemen, he engaged in his day to day work cautiously and tactfully. During Presidential election campaign he worked for General Fonseca.
How can people here help with your campaign?
Your organization and you can make the Sri Lankan government accountable for this heinous act and interrogate them - interrogate them about Prageeth and his disappearance. I intend to organize an Exhibition of Cartoons in the near future. At present, I have been sacked from my job. I am bounded with debts. I need to continue in this struggle, and anything anyone around the world can do to help, is a blessing.
© The Art Journal
Wednesday, April 06, 2011
Australia left wanting when allegations of war crimes arise
By Gideon Boas | The Sydney Morning Herald
.............................................................................................................................................................................................
Palitha Kohona, a dual citizen of Australia and Sri Lanka, has been accused of assisting in organising the alleged murders of three surrendering Tamil Tigers in 2009. In January, two Tamil organisations operating outside Sri Lanka — the Swiss Council of Eelam Tamils and a US group called Tamils Against Genocide — submitted a request to investigate Kohona for the murder of three surrendering Tamil Tigers to the prosecutor of the International Criminal Court. Kohuna is said to have been prominent in negotiating the surrender of the victims while serving in the Sri Lankan government, but has denied any involvement in the alleged event. He is now Sri Lanka's ambassador to the United Nations.
Kohona is not just an Australian citizen; he was also employed, according to Hansard, as a senior official with the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade. The allegations of his involvement in war crimes, therefore, come as an added embarrassment to the Australian government.
Advertisement: Story continues below
Looking at the submission from the Tamil groups to the ICC prosecutor, the factual case itself has problems and complexities. Areas untested before the ICC relating to certain kinds of criminal participation raise question marks, even were the prosecutor prepared to investigate and seek Kohona's prosecution.
However, substantive legal matters aside, the prosecutor is highly unlikely to investigate a case in which three surrendering combatants were believed to have been killed. The prosecutor's office receives many such submissions and requests, only a fraction of which can, and will, ever be investigated — even fewer will be prosecuted. This is because of its policy of prosecuting only the gravest of crimes, and only then when other limiting factors are satisfied.
Which brings consideration of this case back to Australia and the interest — if any — of Australian authorities in either prosecuting or facilitating the prosecution of Kohona for war crimes.
Sri Lanka is not a party to the statute of the ICC and the court has no jurisdiction over its citizens or crimes committed on its territory, unless the United Nations Security Council authorises it. One exception to this limitation is where a perpetrator is a citizen of a country that has ratified the court's statute. The Tamil groups' submission to the ICC states that Australia, as a signatory to the court's statute, has an obligation to assist such an investigation.
Australia is indeed obliged either to prosecute or extradite to the ICC a person who falls under the court's jurisdiction. So far the only response from the government is a general statement that it will support any action by the court. There is no suggestion that the government might itself consider seeking the extradition of Kohona back to Australia for investigation or prosecution here — either under the Commonwealth criminal code or the Geneva Conventions Act.
This is understandable for several reasons. For a start, the facts in relation to Kohona's involvement are vague, there is only, at this stage, the suggestion of an anonymous witness who can put him in the picture and, as a serving ambassador of Sri Lanka, he may be entitled to diplomatic immunity (although where war crimes are concerned, and because he is an ambassador and not a minister, this argument is challengeable).
But beyond that, since the trials of three accused Nazi war criminals living in Australia in the late 1980s and early 1990s Australia has been reluctant to engage in investigating and prosecuting alleged war criminals even where they reside under our noses — let alone where we would have to seek their extradition in such a challenging legal and political environment.
Take the recent case of Dragan Vasiljkovic, the Australian Croatian Serb finally sent to Croatia to face war crimes prosecution only after the High Court ordered his extradition (and after Australian Federal Police managed to recover him from hiding in New South Wales). There was a strong case for us prosecuting Vasiljkovic, an Australian citizen, under the Geneva Conventions Act, but this appears never to have been seriously considered.
In other cases, we have been prepared to facilitate extradition but never to prosecute ourselves. While our legislative framework certainly renders some of these cases complex, the reluctance goes far beyond purely legal considerations. We have a great anxiety about the resources involved in such prosecutions and an even greater anxiety that the Australian public does not really support prosecuting people who committed crimes — even war crimes — in other countries.
While Kohona's case is far from a great example of our reticence in this area, it highlights just how far we are as a country from taking our place as good international citizens; from talking seriously about what to do about alleged war criminals residing within our community, and from having an evolved policy on how to deal with them.
Dr Gideon Boas is an associate professor in the Monash University Law School and was a senior legal officer at the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia.
© The Sydney Morning Herald
Wednesday, April 06, 2011
Sri Lanka: April uprising and the 1978 constitution
By Basil Fernando | Sri Lanka Guardian
.............................................................................................................................................................................................
The events of 1971 do not compare in significance in any way with the 1953 hartal, which was in fact a mass uprising in which most of the population directly or indirectly participated. That uprising came as a result of a call by several political parties, led mainly by the Lanka Samasamaja Party, as a protest against the increase of the price of rationed rice by the UNP government, whose Minister of Finance was JR Jayawardene.
The 1953 uprising virtually shattered the political arrangements of the country and the impact of this great event has not yet been properly grasped. As compared to this, what happened in 1971 was a few activities by groups of young rebels who were loosely organized and who believed in taking up arms against the state. However, between the idea of making an armed uprising and the actual performance, there was a vast gap. Perhaps that was due to the exposure of the attempts to make hand bombs in a few places. The government, which was alerted, immediately went into action, granting license to kill anyone who was suspected of having any kind of a connection with the JVP.
In the first days that followed there were large numbers of killings after arrest and the usual conservative figure that is mentioned is around 10,000. Some even give the figure as 21,000. Due to the intervention of many persons, the government was persuaded to declare an amnesty for those who surrendered. Literally thousands of young persons surrendered, mostly at the encouragement of parents who just wanted to ensure that they would be kept alive.
At the inquiry before the Criminal Justice Commission, the Attorney-General stated in court that the existence of the uprising will be taken as a presumption, and that therefore there was no need to prove the existence of an uprising. The defence did not challenge this position. Perhaps it was to the advantage of the JVP leaders to appear as leaders of a great uprising. Some of the JVP leaders cashed in on this, comparing themselves to the heroes of the 1918 and 1948 rebellions.
What the 1971 uprising in fact showed was a great discontent spread throughout the country, particularly among the younger generation. Large numbers of youths showed willingness to support a call for rebellion, even without any convincing theory or practical, organizational structure to convince them of the validity of the political thought and strategy of the JVP. In fact, there was hardly any kind of political thought, going by the famous five lessons and the lengthy answers given by the JVP leader Rohana Wijeweera during the interrogation relating to the April 5th events. That long document that consisted of his statement to the Criminal Investigation Division showed enormous confusion about a strategy for Sri Lanka, but also about the history of revolutionary movements, and particularly about Marxist thought and history.
The repression of the JVP in 1971 had its impact felt on the political events that were to follow later. All who took to arms in the south and in the north and the east expected the worst by way of repression and therefore were themselves willing to take to the most brutal forms of violence. The nature of the violence that took place in the 1980’s and after in Sri Lanka can only be fathomed by understanding the nature of the repression that was unleashed in 1971.
The greatest advantage of 1971 fell on the United National Party and its leader, JR Jayawardene. This party had had an ignominious defeat in 1970, when the coalition parties won a massive electoral victory with more than 2/3 majority in parliament. This was to be reversed in 1978, when the United National Party won over 80% of seats in the parliament. One of the major reasons for that victory was the political confusion that followed the 1971 April events.
JR Jayawardene, one of whose main ambitions in life was to crush the labour movement in Sri Lanka, utilized this event to maximum use by supporting the coalition government to take whatever repressive action without posing any limits as an opposition party. He saw that his aims would be best served at this point by supporting the coalition government rather than by opposing it.
With the easy victory won in 1978, JR Jayawardene proceeded to displace the basic democratic system itself by giving himself powers and legally destabilizing the system of checks and balances. It can be said that the greatest beneficiary of the 1971 events was JR Jayawardene. His political scheme was to displace the country’s rule of law system and the notion of the separation of powers. When such a drastic change was proposed in form of 1978 constitution there was hardly any serious discussion within the country. The nation is still trapped by this political scheme and all attempts to escape from it have failed. Subsequently, JR Jayawardene’s own party fell victim to Jayawardene’s scheme.
The way the repressive forces within Sri Lanka used the 1971 April events needs far closer study and analysis.
Basil Fernando is executive director of the Asian Legal Resource Centre, based in Hong Kong. He has held several United Nations-related posts, including appeals counsel under the UNHCR for Vietnamese refugees in Hong Kong, officer-in-charge of the Investigation Unit under the U.N. Transitional Authority in Cambodia and chief of legal assistance at the Cambodia Office of the U.N. Center for Human Rights. He is the author of several books on human rights and legal reform issues.
© Sri Lanka Guardian
Wednesday, April 06, 2011
IMF approves seventh tranche of Sri Lanka loan
By Ranga Sirilal | Reuters
.............................................................................................................................................................................................
The impact of crop damage caused by flooding in January and February will be limited owing to the size and strength of the economy, the IMF's executive board said in a statement.
The sixth tranche of the loan is worth $218.3 million, part of a loan programme approved in July 2009 after Sri Lanka's government emerged victorious in a quarter-century separatist war.
© Reuters
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
