Sri Lanka

Taxonomy Color
red
  • Avoid Sri Lanka, France warns citizens

    France has warned its nationals against making non-essential visits to Sri Lanka because of an increase in violence and suicide attacks, Reuters reported.

    In an advisory published on its Web site (www.diplomatie.gouv.fr), on Thursday the Foreign Ministry strongly advised French visitors to avoid the north and east of the island and warned against non-urgent travel in the rest of the country. The move is likely to further negatively impact tourist arrivals to Sri Lanka, where violence has been rising sharply for several months.

    "Given the resumption in violence and suicide attacks ... (travellers are) advised for the moment to reconsider all non-essential travel to Sri Lanka," the French Foreign ministry said.

    The impact of the escalating violence means Sri Lanka's top hotel groups are increasingly relying on their Maldivian operations and investments into India for survival, LankaBusinessOnline reported this week.

    In October, tourists coming from Europe fell 24 percent to 16,000 whereas from key markets like UK, Germany and France it is down even further, Aitken Spence Hotels told LBO.

    Indian tourist arrivals, which have been keeping overall numbers of arrivals better than last year, has also shown a decline in October, despite being up 19 percent for the year.
  • UK takes Sri Lanka off safe return list
    The British Government has relaxed the procedure for thousands of Sri Lankan asylum seekers with immediate effect because of what it sees as a deteriorating security situation in Sri Lanka.

    A British High Commission spokesperson says Sri Lankan asylum seekers could now remain in the country and make their appeals if their applications had been rejected.

    Earlier, Sri Lanka was among 14 countries whose citizens had to leave Britain as soon as their asylum applications were rejected and make any appeal from outside Britain.

    The Sunday Times learns that some 30,000 applications by Sri Lankan seeking asylum in Britain are either pending or rejected.

    "The latest country information on Sri Lanka has been closely examined and given the deteriorating situation in Sri Lanka, the British Home Secretary is of the view that the legal test for designation is no longer met,” the spokesperson explained.

    He said however as the escalation in violence in Sri Lanka had not affected all parts of the country to the same degree, the Home Office would be examining whether it was appropriate to re-introduce a partial geographic designation.

    The move would mean that only the areas directly hit by violence might be considered.
  • 13 abducted within hours of law
    Thirteen civilians,in Jaffna district were abducted last Wednesday night soon after the Sri Lanka government reinstated the draconian Prevention of Terrorism Act (PTA), TamilNet reported.

    ine civilians from Kalviyankadu, Kadaipirai, Dutch road areas in Valigamam east were abducted Wednesday night by armed men alleged to be Sri Lanka Army (SLA) and police, residents in these areas said.

    The same night four civilians in Valigamam north were abducted by SLA, according to complaints made by the relatives of the abducted, at the Jaffna office of the Sri Lanka Human Rights Commission (SLHRC).

    SLA has refused to provide any written evidence to acknowledge that they have "arrested" the disappeared civilians, the relatives told SLHRC.

    Complaints regarding the nine abducted from Valigamam east are yet to be registered with the SLHRC Jaffna, the relatives of the abducted said.

    Meanwhile, Thiyaganagalingam Sundaralingam, 48, a trader and a resident of Ambanai, Tellipalai was abducted by SLA troopers on December 3 around 11:50 p.m from his house located within the SLA High Security Zone (HSZ), according to complaints made by his wife Kamalambikai Sundaralingam to the Jaffna SLHRC.

    Kamalambikai said that her husband was taken away by SLA troopers, but when she complained it to the SLA authorities, they had refused to provide information.

    SLHRC officials are in direct contact with the Commander of the SLA Jaffna Maj. Gen. Chandrasiri regarding Sundaralingam's case but no further information about the arrest is known.
  • Tension in Kattankudy over burial of Sufi leader
    Sectarian violence between orthodox Muslims and an Islamic Sufi sect that preaches pantheism resurfaced in the Muslim town of Kattankudy, Batticaloa, following the death a leader of the Sufi sect

    Mr. M. S. Abdul Payilvan, 69, one of the leaders of the Sufi sect and the President of All Island Tharikathul Mufliheen, passed away in Colombo Apollo hospital on the night of December 6 and was buried at Tharikathul Mufliheen Mosque burial grounds in Kattankudy the following afternoon.

    Orthodox Muslims observed a hartal (general shutdown) demanding the removal of the body from the burial grounds. They claim Kattankudy soil is sacred and bodies belonging to those who preach views contradictory to the holy Quran should not be buried there.

    The Orthodox Muslims are demanding that the body of Mr. Payilvan, who is from Maruthamunai, another Muslim village in the Amparai district, should be exhumed and buried elsewhere.

    Tension prevailed in Kattankudy due to the general shut down and police in large numbers patrolled the area. The Sri Lanka Government provided special police protection to prominent figures of Sufi sect, and the burial ground was guarded by security personnel.

    Three houses belonging to the followers of Payilvan were set ablaze on Thursday night.

    Meanwhile, officials of the Kattankudy Jammiyathul Ulama Council and Federation for Kattankudy Mosques and other Organizations submitted a petition at Batticaloa District Courts demanding the exhumation of Mr. Payilvan's body.

    The death of Mr Pavilvan has only exacerbated a tense situation. On December 3, extremists had dug up the buried body of a Sufi follower from the Tharikathul Mufliheen Mosque burial grounds and dumped the body on a local road as an act of protest.

    Kattankudy Police recovered the body, re-buried it in the original burial space. The area was guarded for few days after the incident.

    In Kattankudy, the hatred between the two factions has widened in the last few years. Violent clashes between the two factions have grown in intensity and have left many injured, and millions of rupees worth of property, including houses and vehicles, damaged.

    In November armed men, alleged to be orthodox Muslims, threw hand grenades and opened fire on Abdul Rauf Moulawi, an Islamic religious teacher belonging to Sufi sect. Civilians standing in front of his office near Kattankudy Bathuriya Mosque were injured.

    While Abdul Rauf Mowlavi's critics say that his teachings have borrowed from Hinduism and he is influenced by Muslims of Tamil Nadu origin settled in Kattankudy, the Sufi sect charges that a Wahabi extremist group funded by powerful sources in the Middle East is responsible for harassing Sufi followers.

  • UN envoy: widen focus beyond child soldiers to humanitarian issues
    In the wake of his visit to Sri Lanka last month, the Special Envoy of the UN Under Secretary General for Children and Armed Conflicts, Ambassador Allan Rock, has recommended that the United Nations widen its focus from only recruitment and use of child soldiers at present to include the killing of children and the denial of humanitarian access for children.

    As part of his visit, Ambassador Rock observed the situation facing children in areas under embargo by the Sri Lankan security forces.

    The Sunday Times last week published extracts from Mr. Rock’s report to the UN.

    It states that his mission in Sri Lanka discovered there was strong and “credible evidence” that the security forces were supporting and sometimes participating in the abductions and forced recruitment of children by the Karuna Group paramilitaries.

    Mr. Rock is said to cite eyewitnesses and families of abducted children along with other sources of evidence to support his findings.

    According to the Sunday Time, Ambassador Rock also states in his report that:

    “I recommend that the Security Council expanding its focus and give equal care and attention to children affected by armed conflict in all situations of concern; and to give equal weight to all categories of grave violations beyond the recruitment and use of child soldiers to include the killing and maiming of children, rape and other grave sexual violence, abductions, attacks against schools or hospitals, and denial of humanitarian access for children.”

    As part of his visit, Ambassador Rock visited the Vahara region where he visited an internally displaced camp which Sri Lankan forces had shelled, killing and wounding dozens of people, including children.

    The region is under a strict embargo by government forces, with starvation on the verge of setting in amid severe shortages of food and medicine.

    Last week, amid intense international pressure, Sri Lankan forces permitted two weeks supply of food to enter. Another 40 trucks worth of food was stopped and sent back.

    Meanwhile, both the Sunday Times and The Sunday Leader newspapers said that Mr. Rock had written to the Sri Lankan government saying that despite Colombo’s denials and vilification of him, the UN official was standing by his report.

    Copies of his report to the UN had been sent to the Sri Lankan government, the papers said.

    “However, in forwarding the evidence, Rock has been careful not to furnish the names or addresses of the eyewitnesses having considered implications for their security, a decision taken in consultation with the international community and top UN officials,” The Sunday Leader said.
  • Terror campaign stepped up in Trincomalee
    Six Tamil civilians have been killed in government-controlled Trincomalee over the past week, as a campaign of terror against local civilians was stepped up.

    A Tamil civilian was shot dead and another wounded December 8 in Orr's Hill, a suburb of Trincomalee town. Armed men in a three-wheeler opened fired at the victims in front of a house along Lower Road.

    Desmond Antony, 46, a sea diver, was killed and Mahendran Uthasooriyan, 36, was injured in the attack.

    On December 7, two more Tamil civilians were shot dead when they were standing a shop at sixth milepost located at Aathimoddai village along Trincomalee-Nilaveli road, north of east port town.

    The armed men fired at Bernard Kingsely, 21, a customer, and Velu Jeyakanthan, 27, a salesman.

    A day earlier, armed persons had hot dead two Tamil villagers and injured another at Uppuveli in Trincomalee when they were returning in their carts with firewood from Kanniya.

    A. Singarasa, 36 and K. Sivananthan, 57, both from 6th Mile Post, Kanniya in Trincomalee, were killed and Chellaiah Sundaralingam, 50, from Varadoya Nagar, Puthukudirupu in Uppuveli was injured.

    On December 5, unidentified men shot dead Mr. Konamalai Kaneshabalan of Gandhinagar, an employee of the Ceylon Electricity Board, while he was on his way to work in Uppuveli, Trincomalee town.

  • Licence to arrest and torture
    Sri Lanka’s Prevention of Terrorist Act (PTA), enacted in 1979, has through the years been strongly criticised by international human rights and constitutional freedom groups, including Amnesty International and the International Commission of Jurists (ICJ), as handing over excessive powers of arrest and detention to the security forces.

    Sri Lankan law requires confessions to be admissible only if made to a magistrate - but the PTA permits confessions to police officer to be used in evidence.

    “Admissibility of [such] confessions encourages the use of torture,” the ICJ says. “The defendants in PTA cases even have to prove that the confessions were made under coercion,” ICJ protests.

    Amnesty International has consistently called for the PTA to be repealed or brought into line with international human rights standards.

    “The PTA provides an incentive for interrogating [police] officers to obtain ‘confessions’ from detainees by any means, including torture,” Amnesty says.

    Human Rights Watch noted in 2002: “The PTA has contributed to a climate of impunity in Sri Lanka where custodial abuse and thousands of "disappearances" have gone uninvestigated and unpunished.”

    In the interests of peace, HRW said, “Critically important is the need to eliminate or reform the Prevention of Terrorism Act and to release the hundreds of detainees held without trial under its draconian provisions,”

    “Most of these detainees are Tamils arrested on suspicion of links to the LTTE. Many were arrested months or even years ago pending investigation, with no evidence to support police suspicions beyond their own confessions - often extracted under torture,” HRW said.

    Human rights lawyers say the PTA was used arbitrarily to arrest and hold individuals with the slightest contact with the LTTE, resulting in tens of thousands of people being detained.

    In 2000 alone, up to 18,000 people were held under the PTA and Emergency Regulations, rights groups say.

    When the UNF government began peace talks with the LTTE in 2002, the comprehensive Ceasefire Agreement (CFA) signed in February that year shelved the PTA.

    Clause 2.12 of the CFA states: “The Parties agree that search operations and arrests under the Prevention of Terrorism Act shall not take place. Arrests shall be conducted under due process of law in accordance with the Criminal Procedure Code.”

    The PTA was thus effectively suspended and all those arrested under it, except for those directly implicated in attacks blamed on the LTTE, were released.

    The number of PTA detentions thus dropped to a few dozen.

    A reinstatement of the PTA will thus become a standing breach of the CFA.

    Criticising the PTA and ER in 2002, one of Sri Lanka’s former Supreme Court judges, Mr. C. V. Vigneswaran, pointed out “such laws it must be noted are not conducive to the creation of an environment for peace.”

    “Such laws are devious methods by which conformation to the International Covenants on Human Rights are avoided,” he said.
  • Mahinda: you're either with us or against us

    Announcing tough new powers for the Sri Lankan security forces, President Mahinda Rajapakse last issued a blunt warning for citizens – ‘choose your side in the war.’

    President Rajapakse climbs into a Kfir jet bomber of the Sri Lanka Air Force. Photo The Island
    He called on the Sinhala polity to actively support his efforts to defeat ‘separatist terrorism’ and warned Tamils “there is no room anymore to assist terrorism directly or indirectly.”

    “I ask this of all political parties, all media, and all people’s organizations,” he said last Wednesday in a countrywide television broadcast in which he announced the new terrorism measures.

    “You decide whether you should be with a handful of terrorists or with the common man who is in the majority. You must clearly choose between these two sides. No one can represent both these sides at any one time.”

    Declaring that the people who elected him in November 2005 gave him a mandate “to defend the motherland,” he said he relished the task and would dedicate his second year in office to it.

    “I am aware that more than one year ago, it is with the greatest confidence that you entrusted me with the responsibility of protecting our beloved motherland, and not being subdued by whatever forces that sought to divide it.”

    “What satisfies me most about the past year is the ability of our government to gradually extricate our country from the great betrayal it was facing,” he said.

    He was referring the Norwegian-brokered peace process began by the opposition UNP party when it came to power in 2001.

    “We cannot move an inch forward other than by defeating this cruel terrorism that is intertwined with the common destiny of my country and the Sri Lankan nation. I am happy to be able to be committed to this task. I am happier still by the support extended to us for this purpose by the entire nation.”

    “The new century waits for the day when [Sri Lankans] all join as one nation to fight together to defeat the challenges of the future. I intend to dedicate my second year in office to realizing this objective,” he said.

    Saying that his government was confronting a dangerous enemy, he called on the Sinhala polity to actively rally behind his efforts to defeat it.

    “What our government is facing is separatist terrorism which is the common enemy of us all,” President Rajapakse said.

    “It is the responsibility of us all to face it jointly and defeat it.”

    “[But] this is not a thing that can be achieved by making allegations and counter allegations against each other. I have already demonstrated that I am a leader who is not ready to kneel before terrorism, but a leader committed to safeguarding the democratic rights of the Tamil people.

    “Therefore, in the name of the nation, I appeal for the practical support of all of you to defeat these challenges,” he said.

    “By practical support I mean the support that is not confined to words. It is support that is extended to me and to my government.”

    “If instead, the decision taken by us at this moment is not properly implemented, its full benefit will go to terrorism. Therefore, I call upon all political leaders to assist us to overcome this challenge, by building a genuine and practical unity for the sake of our motherland.”

    He was continuing a long struggle by former Sri Lankan leaders, he said.

    “Beginning with Prime Minister Sirimavo Bandaranaike, all leaders from President J. R. Jayewardene to President Chandrika Kumaratunga sought to face up to this grave threat to the nation and bring peace to our motherland.”

    “All steps that we take to build a new Sri Lanka can be made a success only by defeating this beastly terrorism.”

    He told the island’s Tamils, however, that they need not fear the draconian counter-terrorism laws he was reinstating.

    “I appeal to all members of the Tamil community and all organizations that value democracy not to have any fears about these regulations that are effective from today. These regulations will not affect any rights in the workplace, field and university. I will not allow the violation of human rights in any manner through these regulations.”

    “These regulations will only defeat the fascist thinking of the LTTE. What these regulations will do is bring democratic politics to the Tamil political arena.”

    However, he said, “We should make a firm commitment not to allow anyone to take these new regulations lightly.”

    “Whatever one’s status may be, supporting terrorism is act of enmity towards both the country and the nation. We are not ready to allow that.”

    “Similarly, there is no room anymore to assist terrorism directly or indirectly, and talk about democracy.”

    This, he said, “is because they use this democratic space to design the destruction of the entire society. The democracy that creates an opportunity for terrorism is a joke. It is no simple joke but a deadly joke. We already reddened our eyes through that joke.”
  • Sri Lanka revives anti-terror measures
    Sri Lanka's cabinet last week announced sweeping anti-terror measures which had been suspended by the 2002 Ceasefire Agreement amid months of violence that has left the truce in shreds.

    The decision came in the wake of a suicide bombing that narrowly missed Sri Lanka Defence Secretary Gothebaya Rajapakse and for which the government has blamed the LTTE.

    "The prevention of terrorism act [comes] because, with the escalation of violence and terrorism activities, we need to have some control," Sri Lanka’s defence spokesman and government minister Keheliya Rambukwella told Reuter.

    "With the signing of the ceasefire agreement, that (PTA) was set aside. It [was] dormant," he said.

    Ministers stopped short of banning the LTTE but tightened existing emergency laws which have been dormant since a 2002 Ceasefire agreement (CFA) that is now in shreds.

    Sri Lankan security forces again have wide-ranging powers to search, arrest and question.

    The government said the far-reaching measures, which do not mention the Tamil Tigers by name, were effective immediately.

    Wearing a uniform "relating to terrorism" or assisting or harbouring anyone "engaged in terrorism" will be prohibited under the new regulations, a statement said.

    Taking part in "any activity relating to terrorism" is also banned, as is any financial or other support to a person or group deemed to be engaged in "terrorist-related activities".

    "Contravention of these regulations carries penalties imposed by a high court, varying from imprisonment from 10 to 20 years, or five to 10 years, depending on the nature of the offence," the statement said.

    Foreign Minister Mangala Samaraweera said Sri Lanka's ban on the LTTE had not been reimposed because a similar move in 1998 had failed to end violence.

    Observers say Wednesday's announcement is aimed at appearing tough while not closing the door on negotiations with the LTTE.

    TamilNet reported the cabinet decision was "a major breach" of the CFA (Clause 2.12) and gave "excessive powers of arrest and detention to the Sri Lankan armed forces"

    It recalled that "thousands of Tamil men, women and children were indiscriminately arrested, tortured and detained for indefinite periods" until previous anti-terror laws were suspended as part of peace moves.

    Sri Lanka's government lifted its ban on the Tamil Tigers ahead of the ceasefire deal and peace talks brokered by Norway.

    The old Prevention of Terrorism Act was effectively suspended following the truce.

    The main opposition said it supports the new regulations, if they were to outlaw terrorist activities.

    Tissa Attanayake, Secretary General of the UNP which has signed a Memorandum of Understanding with the Rajapsakse government did not rule out that there is also a danger in these laws if applied to submerge political activities in the south.

    When told UNP also adopted such laws in the past and there were disappearances and assassinations carried out in the guise of these laws, he said everybody witnessed what happened in the period between1988 and 1989.

    “It was a period of terror”, he said.

    Attanayake said although government bring in these laws to counter terrorism in no way could stop the efforts to find a political solution to the national question.

    The leader of the TNA, Sri Lanka’s largest Tamil party, R. Sambanthan said though these laws were there in the past it did not help to bring a solution to the conflict.

    Those who have taken arms to their hands to fight a war were not affected by anti-terror laws but it was mostly the innocent Tamil people who were affected, Sampanthan said.
  • Cheaper through Vanni
    Jaffna residents say they paid less to pass through the Tiger tolls on the A-9 than what they now pay to take the government's lengthy detour.

    "Bus fare was only Rs. 150 [US$1.50]" before the A-9 was closed, Jaffna resident Shri Nathan, told the Christian Science Monitor.

    "Passengers didn't have to pay anything. Only business people did."

    Now passengers pay Rs. 300 [US$3] for the bus ride from Mannar or Vavuniya to Trincomalee and an additional Rs. 1500 [US$15] for the sea passage from Trincomalee to Jaffna.

    "It takes three days for travel. It will be good if they open the A-9," says Suhasini Vickramasurya, a high school student. "We used to be able to go from Vavuniya to Jaffna in four hours."

    http://www.csmonitor.com/2006/1122/p07s01-wosc.html
  • US: LTTE is not a threat to region or world

    Whilst the United States considered the Tamil Tigers a terrorist group, they are not a threat to the region or part of global terrorism, Washington’s Ambassador to Sri Lanka, Robert O' Blake, said last week.

    US Ambassador Blake visited Sri Lankan military forces in Jaffna earlier this month. Photo Sri Lanka Army
    Moreover, Sri Lanka should negotiate a solution to the conflict with the LTTE, who are representing the Tamil people in the negotiations, Ambassador Blake said.

    And whilst the US was supporting Sri Lanka to dissuade the LTTE from pursuing the military option to the Tamil question, that did not mean Washington wanted Colombo to prosecute its own war, he said.

    Ambassador Blake’s comments came in a lengthy interview with the state-own Daily News, published December 5.

    He began by reiterating Washington’s support for Sri Lanka saying: “the US is not neutral in this particular conflict. We have always been a strong supporter of the Government and we consider the LTTE as a terrorist organisation.”

    “So we are doing what we can to help the Government through enforcement channels, through military channels to defend itself in the war on terrorism.”

    However, Ambassador Blake said, that does not mean the US endorses a military solution.

    “All this is to help Sri Lanka defend itself. We have been very clear that our strong interest is in not seeing the military prosecute this war, but to send a signal of strength that will hopefully see the LTTE coming to the negotiating table.”

    “After more than 25 years of conflict here, the time has come for peace in Sri Lanka. The real solution for this conflict is a sustained negotiating process that hopefully leads to an agreement of some sort between the two parties.

    “We strongly believe that there cannot be a military solution to this particular conflict. [Sri Lanka] tried that for a long time and it has not worked. So we strongly believe that the time has come for a peaceful negotiated settlement to your conflict.”

    Asked if Sri Lanka should negotiate with terrorists, he replied: “We do think you can negotiate with the terrorists [and] there have been many different exchanges in the past, in fact six rounds of negotiations in 2002/3.”

    Asked if the Sri Lankan government should present its proposals “to the LTTE or the Tamil people?”, Ambassador Blake replied:

    “Well, at this point, to my knowledge, the LTTE is the one that is representing the Tamil people in the negotiations. That has been the history of the negotiations to this date, beginning in 2002 and carried to 2003.”

    “The answer to this [ethnic] question is not purely a counter-terrorism or a military solution. There also has to be a parallel political strategy where the Government advances a power-sharing proposal of some sort,” he said further.

    “We believe that the SLFP-UNP agreement is really the best opportunity to have come along in some time. We very much hope that this effort would succeed and form the basis for proposals that can be tabled at future negotiations.”

    Asked about American interests in the island, Ambassador Blake said:

    “Sri Lanka is a friendly democratic country in a region that is increasingly important to the US, and a region that is facing some challenges. When you look at places like Pakistan, Bangladesh and other parts like Afghanistan, these are all countries that are facing challenges. So, it is very important for us that there be democratic, multi-ethnic success stories in the region. Certainly India can be that, and we hope Sri Lanka can be that as well. Sri Lanka has the added importance to us of being in the major shipping links in the Indian Ocean.”

    Asked if the LTTE was a threat to the region, not only to Sri Lanka, Ambassador Blake replied:

    “I do not think so. I think the LTTE has been very careful about confining their operations to Sri Lanka because they are aware of the fact that if they should do so if they not want to antagonise particularly neighbours like India.”

    “So they have been very careful and I think they have realised that one of the greatest strategical mistakes they made in their history was targeting Rajiv Gandhi.”

    Asked, again, if the LTTE was a threat globally “because they exchange views, knowledge etc. [with other terrorist groups],” Ambassador Blake replied:

    “I do not know to what extent they operate globally. I am sure they try to derive lessons as best as they can from the experiences of other terrorist organisations around the world. But, I am not aware of them taking terrorist action in another country, other than the attack on Rajiv Gandhi.”

    Asked why US was urging Sri Lanka to talk to the LTTE whilst attacking others it considered terrorists, Ambassador Blake replied:

    “I think it is dangerous to make comparisons between one country and the next. Every single country is different. In our case, the terrorists that we are pursuing are mostly stateless organisations like Al-Qaeda that are not based in any single country. They are just out to kill as many Americans as possible, and there is really no point in trying to negotiate with them because they do not have any political objective to speak of.”

    “I think the LTTE, by contrast, though surely is pursuing terrorist objectives, has the ultimate political objective to establish some sort of framework where the rights of Tamils can be respected.”

    “So we believe that there cannot be a military solution to this, and that there has to be a negotiated settlement where the aspirations of all Sri Lankans; Tamils, Sinhalese, Muslims and others, can be respected.”
  • Sri Lanka government recoils from 'devolution' report
    The Sri Lankan government has formally distanced itself from a ‘majority’ report submitted by a divided experts committee on devolution of power set up by President Mahinda Rajapaksa to solve the island’s ethnic conflict, the Hindustan Times reported.

    The move came as the ultra-Sinhala nationalist JVP, Sri Lanka’s third largest party and an ideological ally of President Rajapakse walked out of the all-party committee the report was commissioned for, in protest at suggestions power should be shared with the Tamils.

    Denying that the government backed the recommendations made by 11 out of the 17 members of the panel, cabinet spokesman Anura Priyadarshana Yapa said on Sunday that reports describing the recommendations as embodying the government’s views were mere “speculation”.

    More significantly, he also saw mischief in such an interpretation, saying that these reports could be an attempt to belittle the steps taken by the government to battle the "fascist designs of the LTTE."

    But on Tuesday, the JVP said it was withdrawing from the All Party Representative Committee (APRC), saying it was going off the track by taking into consideration ‘undemocratic’ recommendations.

    Eleven of the seventeen experts had agreed on a common report though individual members had noted reservations on certain points. This is presented as the ‘majority’ report.

    But the main ‘minority’ report reflecting a conservative Sinhala majoritarian view comes from four other members, all Sinhalese, including the top lawyer and doyen of Sinhala nationalists, H. L. De Silva, PC.

    There will also be two dissenting reports presented by two other members, also Sinhalese.

    Political observers say that the rightwing Rajapakse government’s eagerness to distance itself from the ‘majority report’ stems from an anxiety not to alienate the majority Sinhala community, which has consistently opposed substantial devolution of power to the Tamil majority North-East, seeing it as a stepping stone to secession.

    The Hindustan Times’ correspondent, PK Balachandran, says it is noteworthy that the government thinks it fit to distance itself from the majority report despite the fact that 6 of the 11 who wrote it are Sinhala.

    The majority report had recommended the retention of the present unit of devolution, namely, the provinces.

    But the "minority report" had recommended that the "village" be the unit of devolution, thus denying to the minority Tamils, the right to an autonomous North Eastern Province.

    The minority report was not against the retention of the provinces, but it said that key strategic areas like ports and airports should be with the Centre.

    The Majority Report favoured the continued unification of the Northern and Eastern Provinces to give the Tamils a unified place of habitation, though the unification effected in 1987 had been annulled this year by the Supreme Court.

    But as a concession to the Sinhalas and Muslims, it wanted the unification to be subjected to a referendum in 10 years.

    The minority report, on the other hand, was totally opposed to the unification.

    The Sinhalese fear a Tamil reconsolidation of the Northeast which could lead to secession of the traditional Tamil homeland which comprises one third of Sri Lanka’s landmass and two thirds of its coastline.

    The majority report supported the creation of autonomous enclaves for Muslims and Sinhalese in the merged Northeast.

    But the minority report said that ethnic enclaves would only tear the national fabric.

    The majority report said that any new constitution should do away with the Concurrent List in the case of the Tamil-majority Northeastern province.

    But the minority report said that the concurrent list, which allows the Centre to legislate on some devolved subjects, should be retained to prevent the provinces from breaking away from the national mainstream.

    The majority report wanted two Vice Presidents to be appointed, one each from the minority Tamil and Muslim communities.

    But the minority report said that it would be enough if key cabinet portfolios were given to the minorities.

    While the majority wanted all state land in the provinces to be vested with the provincial government, the Minority wanted all such land to continue to be vested with the Centre.

    The majority wanted Sri Lanka not to have a state religion or any religion to be given the "foremost" position. But the Minority wanted the present system wherein Buddhism enjoys "foremost position" to continue.

    The Tamils and Muslims like the State to be secular and not identified with one religion because religion in Sri Lanka is mixed up with ethnicity.

    Most Sinhalas are Buddhist, while most Tamils are Hindus. And the Muslims see themselves as a distinct religio-ethnic group with an Arab origin.
  • Driving Norway out
    In the wake of the Heroes Day speech by Tamil Tiger leader Vellupillai Pirapaharan, Norwegian Special Envoy Jon Hanssen-Bauer flew to Sri Lanka.
     
    Amid the deepening violence in the Sri Lanka, it was merely to be another round of shuttle-diplomacy, to 'sound out' President Mahinda Rajapakse's administration and the LTTE. But something very different to routine happened this time.
     
    When he met government officials, he was given a blunt directive: he was not to go to Kilinochchi to meet the LTTE until the government granted him permission. The hapless envoy cooled his heels in Colombo and waited.
     
    He eventually went to Kilinochchi - empty handed. He returned empty handed too.
     
    But something crucial had happened. By agreeing to the government's terms for Norway's involvement in peace efforts, Mr. Hanssen-Bauer had compromised Oslo's 'third party' neutrality. More importantly, Oslo's prestige as a respected actor on the international stage had been dulled.
     
    In short, his curt order to stay put was a humiliation for an international diplomat fronting not only Norway but the collective international community involved in Sri Lanka's peace process - i.e. the Co-Chairs.
     
    The neutrality of the third party is sine quo non for peace making. At the outset, despite the international intrigue in Sri Lanka, Norway treated both parties equally in the peace process and, equally importantly, was treated with dignity and respect by the parties to the peace process.
     
    Interestingly, throughout the peace process there has never been friction - at least publicly - between the LTTE, the armed non-state actor, and Norway, frontsman for the international (state) system.
     
    There have been periodic bouts of friction between the Sri Lankan state and Norway. Apart from the embarrassing and now infamous 'salmon-eating busybodies' incident, there were (unsuccessful) demands that then Special Envoy Erik Solheim be replaced.
     
    These frictions were mainly with President Chandrika Kumaratunga's office and later administration. The market friendly - and Sinhala conservative - UNP got on famously with the Norwegians.
     
    But even the moments of friction did not involve official attacks on Norway's integrity or those of its personnel by the Sri Lankan government.
     
    But that was before President Mahinda Rajapakse came to power on a surge of Sinhala-nationalist support. As he made clear last week, their mandate, as he sees it, is to 'defend the motherland.'
     
    And not only from the 'separatist terrorism' of the LTTE, but also from "whatever forces that sought to divide it."
     
    If that wasn't clear enough, President Rajapakse declared: "What satisfies me most about the past year is the ability of our government to gradually extricate our country from the great betrayal it was facing."
     
    By that he means removing Sri Lanka from the obligations incurred during the Norwegian peace process, especially the federal solution.
     
    From the outset, President Rajapakse made it clear he did not value the Norwegian help. He claimed he would solve the problem if could talk directly with Mr. Pirapaharan.
     
    Dismissed by everyone as a political stunt or mere rhetoric, the underlying corollary was ignored: just as he had promised in the election manifesto that proudly bears his personal stamp of ownership - 'Mahinda Cinthanaya' - he intended to end Norway's involvement.
     
    Why would the President, inheriting a country riven by renewed violence drive out a key international ally in peace building? Because President Rajapakse wants 'peace with dignity' - by which he means the restoration of Sinhala hegemony and an end to upstart Tamil aspirations.
     
    In short, he wants to destroy the LTTE miltiarily.
     
    The first step to doing that is to isolate them from the international community which, in his view, has given too much emphasis to the Tigers' opinions and demands.
     
    And the first step to isolating the Tigers is, in his view, to get rid of Norway or at least replace her with a more appropriate interlocutor - i.e. one that is hostile to the LTTE.
     
    Indeed, President Rajapakse didn't even mention Norway in his inaugural address as President in November 2005 - though he went through a range of international 'alternatives' to Norway.
     
    President Rajapakse began his unstated, but discernible plan at once. In December he turned publicly and pointedly to India for help with solving the ethnic question.
     
    The move failed. Not only was India unfavourable to replacing the Norwegians, an alarmed Delhi could see what many other internationals did not: Rajapakse was not intent on a negotiated solution but was instead preparing the military option.
     
    With Delhi's involvement not forthcoming, President Rajapakse had to find an alternative way of removing the Norwegians.
     
    He did not wish to simply tell them to get out: they could take much international goodwill and not a little international aid with them.
     
    However, if he couldn't ask them to go, he could certainly make it impossible for them to stay.
     
    One thing President Rajapakse was sure of is that his efforts to eject the Norwegians would draw considerable support from the Sinhalese. (It is no accident that not once has the UNP, despite its closeness to Oslo, ever publicly defended the Norwegians' efforts).
     
    Notwithstanding claims of a 'peace constituency' in the south, the insidious campaign run by the ultra-Sinhala nationalists such as the JVP, JHU and PNM - assisted by the regular criticism by President Chandrika - had laid the groundwork for President Rajapakse.
     
    Numerous protests outside the Norwegian embassy - often accompanied by the torching of the Norwegian flag - had already muddied Oslo's standing such that even very public sponsorings of Buddhist temples in the south could not fix. (Even Norway's offers to discuss their role with the JVP only lent weight to the latter's disdain for Oslo.)
     
    Indeed, shortly after President Rajapakse came to power, the JVP et al again began agitating against the Norwegians, stoking ever present suspicions amongst the people. It was by his acts of omission that President Rajapakse helped this campaign: he never spoke publicly in praise of Norway's efforts and never gave Norwegian diplomats public accolades.
     
    When the February 2006 peace talks were agreed to, amid fast rising violence, the LTTE suggested the talks could be held in Oslo. President Rajapakse refused.
     
    His opting for Geneva (disregarding an earlier demand any more talks must be within Sri Lanka itself) was not so much about contradicting the LTTE (as was commonly understood) as snubbing Norway.
     
    The peace process stalled: the Geneva I agreement on paramilitaries became a laughing stock, violence escalated.
     
    But it was the proscription of the LTTE by Canada and the European Union that fast tracked President Rajapakse's plans. If the original plan was to eject Norway to isolate the LTTE, particularly from the EU, then the wider objectives had unexpectedly come about anyway.
     
    The urgency to eject Norway thus eased temporarily. Now it was a question of stepping up military operations (particularly in the east) and destroying the peace process by escalating the conflict.
     
    The objective of marginalizing Norway remained. In July President Rajapakse sent a personal message to the LTTE to talk directly. It was conveyed by N. Vithyatharan, the editor of the Jaffna daily, Uthayan.
     
    "If the LTTE and the government can agree to put an end to all violence for two weeks, [we] could make a fresh start and develop the rapport from there on. We don't have to do it through Norway or be dependent on them, we can deal directly," the paper quoted Mr. Rajapakse as asking Mr. Vithyatharan to tell the Tigers.
     
    But the LTTE rejected the notion, insisting Norway remains as facilitator.
     
    In July the Sri Lankan government even agreed to hold talks in Oslo. But the July 'meeting' - in which Norway unilaterally invited the government and the LTTE - turned into a fiasco.
     
    The government sent a non-delegation comprising relatively junior officials. The LTTE said it came to meet with Norway, not Sri Lanka.
     
    Piqued by the LTTE, Norway held very public meetings with top Sri Lankan officials - even the King of Norway met Sri Lanka's Foreign Minister.
     
    But whilst this did not make Colombo any more amenable to Norwegian's continued role, it boosted Sinhala nationalist haughtiness about the 'white Tigers.' Meanwhile, another Norwegian-wielded thorn in President Rajapakse's side was the international ceasefire monitors' presence on the ground.
     
    Cutting them off from the LTTE was an imperative, but harder to achieve than fending of the Norwegian diplomats. And amid an expanding military campaign, it was imperative they also be constrained.
     
    Twice now the Rajapakse administration has tried to compel the SLMM to pull out of its own accord - by firing artillery barrages at SLMM chiefs when they meet with the LTTE.
     
    The first was in July at Maavil Aru and the second time was in Pooneryn in November.
     
    With neither the Norwegian diplomats nor the ceasefire monitors they appointed showing any signs of leaving, the campaign against them has escalated.
     
    When he met Indian Premier Manmohan Singh in November, President Rajapakse didn't disguise his wish to see the Norwegians depart. His very public grumble makes it clear: 'the unwelcome Norwegians are in our house; if only they would go.'
     
    Then there were the recent lurid allegations against Norwegian Development Minister Erik Solheim, Olso’s former Special Envoy.
     
    It was the state-owned Daily News which published allegations of financial dealings between him and the LTTE. The shocking claims compelled the Norwegian government to issue an angry denial - and this week even the main opposition in Norway felt it had to come out and back Mr. Solheim.
     
    Sri Lanka's vice-like control of state media is well known, and particularly the mass- circulating English language Daily News would not have printed the story without either receiving official sanction or being sure it would get it.
     
    Indeed, President Rajapakse's administration is yet to apologize for making the allegations - and the Daily News is yet to distance itself from them.
     
    It is in this humiliating context that Mr. Hanssen-Bauer arrived in Sri Lanka last week, to be treated, not as a key international figure, but an interfering busybody.
     
    In the past a visit by Norwegian Envoys, even when 'routine', drew considerable interest within Sri Lankan and abroad - a quick stock take and return would sometimes invoke lurid media headlines of diplomatic 'failure.'
     
    But Mr. Hanssen-Bauer's recent visit was seen more as an oddity, a curious development at this time of deepening antagonisms.
     
    Ironically, it is Norwegian persistence with the peace process in Sri Lanka is likely to draw more and more public slaps in the face from the Rajapakse administration.
     
    And it is not simply a question of Norwegian prestige in the Sri Lankan context, but globally.
     
    In the meantime, Sri Lanka's undeclared war continues at all the intensity of the late ninties.
     
    But, as President Rajapakse intended, it is Oslo which may finally pull the plug on the Norwegian peace process.
  • International Mandate
    Sri Lanka's undeclared but open war continues. Last week the Army launched its most determined push yet to capture Vaharai in the Batticaloa district. The offensive failed with at least 40 combatants killed. However it was the 40,000 Tamil civilians crowded into that narrow strip of land that bore the brunt of the Sri Lankan onslaught: at least 40 people were torn apart by artillery and naval fire. Scores more were wounded. The offensive came as Norwegian Special Envoy Jon Hanson-Bauer departed the island.
     
    But it is not only the fighting in that remote backwater that we should take note of. It is the deafening silence from around the world as Colombo unleashes an indiscriminate military campaign. The protests this week by the UN and the international monitors are, of no consequence. The United States did protest last week - but that was only after LTTE shells killed three Sinhalese civilians and caused 3000 others to flee. They were singled out, but not the 40,000 people in Vaharai. We know why. In the meantime over half a million Tamils are undergoing great hardship in Jaffna. But there is no pressure on Sri Lanka to open the A9.
     
    In fact, there is no international pressure on Sri Lanka in any respect. The government of President Mahinda Rajapakse is essentially being given a green light to prosecute its long-prepared war against the LTTE. The Tamils therefore need to come to terms with the international community's new strategy: to allow the government to attack and weaken the Tigers until whatever political solution Colombo sees fit can be imposed. The Co-Chairs statement of November 22 said as much. Apart from a mild reproach to both parties (accompanied by a vehement US attack on the LTTE) it leaves it to the Sinhala south to come up with solution. Having failed to persuade Colombo to make a genuine offer of power-sharing to the Tamils, the international community has opted for the easiest alternative: allowing the Sinhalese to proceed with a military solution. The Tamils should be under no illusions; just as during the previous 'war for peace' the international community will not be mere bystanders, but will be actively seeking ways to strengthen and support the state against the LTTE.
     
    It is thus not clear why Mr. Hanson-Bauer was in Sri Lanka last week. The lone envoy did not have a chorus of diplomatic support when he arrived. And most damagingly for the Norwegian initiative, Oslo's neutrality (at least perceived neutrality) was badly compromised when he acquiesced to Colombo's pointed curtailing of his facilitatory space. With Sri Lanka's passing of the Prevention of Terrorism Act (PTA) - and semantic hair-splitting aside, it is the draconian PTA that's been invoked anew - it appears the Norwegians will need Colombo's explicit approval to speak to the LTTE. So much for peace facilitation.
     
    Mr. Rajapakse's address last week announcing the new terrorism legislation was also a declaration of war. The President, it should not be forgotten, was voted in wholly by the majority Sinhalese. It was this constituency he began by thanking for giving him a mandate to 'defend the motherland.' The rest of his speech was a call to arms, to a new war. And it was not only the LTTE, but the wider Tamil campaign for self-determination that is the target (the original PTA, it should be recalled, was implemented in the wake of the TULF's landslide victory in the 1977 'Eelam' election; the LTTE was less than 30 strong then.) Saying that he relished the task set by his voters, President Rajapakse told Sri Lankans to choose: to stand with his Sinhala-nationalist cause or against it. The Tamils were told in no uncertain terms what was expected of them: as long as they know their place in this, the Sinhala motherland, they were of no concern to him.
     
    None of this is new. Sinhala leaders have told the Tamils such things since 1956. And, as our shattered homeland attests, this is not the first onslaught (wrapped in the rhetoric of counter-terrorism) that we have faced from the Sinhala leadership. But this time we know what Tamil hardliners have been warning all along. That international commitment to peace is wafer thin. That when the Sinhalese baulk at sharing power, the international community will again let a clash of arms settle matters. That the international community's strident advocacy of 'just solutions', 'human rights' and 'lasting peace' is mere rhetoric. Just as in 2001, international support for a peaceful negotiation can only be secured when the viability of Sri Lanka's military option is again discredited. Until then, the Tamils can expect all manner of horrors. But it is not our fault. For years we have tried our best to plead our case. But no one gave a damn.
  • Vaharai's agony continues
    Sri Lanka’s military continued its assault against the LTTE-held Vaharai region over the weekend, killing scores of Tamil civilians with air and artillery strikes. The United Nations and international ceasefire monitors protested the targeting of civilians.
     
    Ever since tens of thousands of Tamils who fled earlier Sri Lankan military offensives in Trincomalee arrived in Vaharai, in northern Batticaloa, the government has cut off supplies of food and medicine to the impoverished region, creating a humanitarian crisis.
     
    The ICRC was loading wounded refugees into boats on the Vaharai coast when Sri Lankan artillery began to explode nearby. Photo TamilNet
    There are over 45,000 internally displaced people (IDPs) in the Vaharai area, which has been under siege for three months.
     
    But only one convoy has been allowed to Vaharai since October 30.
     
    Even then, 30 of the trucks carrying food in that convoy were not allowed by the military to proceed across the border. Those that got through brought enough food for two weeks at most.
     
    Whilst maintaining the economic embargo, despite international disquiet, the Sri Lankan government has continued daily bombardment and repeated offensives to overrun the LTTE-held region.
     
    Over 40 civilians were killed by Sri Lankan artillery over the weekend as the military launched another determined effort to capture Vaharai.
     
    A Sri Lanka Army (SLA) offensive from south of Vaharai along the costal line towards Panichchankerni was defeated Sunday.
     
    The assault failed to break through LTTE resistance. At least 28 Sri Lankan soldiers and 16 Tigers were killed based on each side’s admission of losses Sunday.
     
    The Army claimed to have killed 40 Tigers and the LTTE said 53 SLA soldiers had been killed, including 30 in Saturday’s fighting.
     
    The Army claimed it had been restrained in its use of heavy firepower for fear of killing Tamil civilians.
     
    But civilians bore the brunt of the Sri Lankan onslaught.
     
    On Sunday 19 civilians were killed by Sri Lankan shelling and 50 were wounded, 27 critically.
     
    On Saturday at least 15 civilians, including a 6-month-old baby, were killed and 41 wounded, ten critically, when the military shelled IDP camps in Vammivedduvan and Palchenai.
     
    Many more were feared dead and wounded. Refugees told medical workers that dead bodies were being buried as they were fleeing from artillery fire.
     
    On Sunday, the Tamil Rehabilitation Organisation (TRO) appealed for the SLMM and aid workers to be allowed in.
     
    “Over 30 shells have landed close to the Vaharai Hospital in the past few hours and six TRO-run Camps for internally displaced persons (IDPs) in the area have received direct hits from shells,” the TRO said.
     
    On Monday, the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) was allowed by the military to evacuate 30 wounded civilians, including seven children.
     
    A cluster of seven boats moved them from Vaharai to a hospital in government-controlled Valaichenai to the south.
     
    But even as the boats were being loaded, Sri Lanka artillery shells exploded nearby, compelling the ICRC to abandon another task – the recovery of the bodies of 4 SLA soldiers left behind on Sunday.
     
    "Many difficulties had to be overcome to organize this evacuation", said Martin de Boer, head of the ICRC sub-delegation in Batticaloa, who led the operation.
     
    "But thanks to the security guarantees provided by both parties to the conflict, we finally succeeded in reaching Vaharai hospital and evacuating the most serious cases. However, other more injured civilians are waiting to be evacuated".
     
    The ICRC reminded both parties “of their obligation to comply with international humanitarian law.
     
    “[We] urgently calls upon both parties to ensure the protection of the civilian population as well as to facilitate the delivery of humanitarian aid. Finally [we] urge the parties to respect the freedom of movement of internally displaced people,” the ICRC said.
     
    The Batticaloa district Parliamentarian, S. Jeyanandamoorthy, condemned the Sri Lankan government for waging a “coward’s war” against civilians.
     
    In comments Sunday he also condemned the international community for standing by and urged it "not to show bias in their condemnation of the attacks that targeted civilians."
     
    He was referring to the prompt condemnation Friday of an LTTE artillery attack that hit a school and houses belonging to Sinhalese near the Kallaru SLA camp.
     
    An estimated 3,000 Sinhalese fled the area and were receiving government and international assistance further away.
     
    The Sri Lankan government flew journalists to the area to photograph the damaged houses and school.
     
    "While the Government provides Sinhalese civilians of Sinhapura, Mahindapura, Somapura and Kallaru transport along the land route to the safe locations, it hesitates to even allow the critically wounded Tamil civilians in need of urgent medical treatment from Vaharai to Valaichenai or Batticaloa," Mr. Jeyanandamoorthy said,
     
    "You don't serve peace if you fail to condemn the Sri Lankan government in strongest possible terms for engaging in aggression on civilian population," he said in an appeal to the international community.
Subscribe to Sri Lanka