federalidea.com

By Dr. S. Narapalasingam

With the resumption of the war early 2006, the twists and turns in the political process with a military component have exposed the confusing and contradictory roles of the egoists, fanatics, terrorists and pseudo patriots in turbulent Sri Lanka. Their rhetoric and actions are damaging not only the prospects for securing lasting peace but also the future of Sri Lanka as a stable democratic socialist country. The people in all communities-Sinhalese, Tamils and Muslims also face an uncertain future. This is largely due to inaction on several matters critical to good governance, rule of law, human rights, civil liberty, ethnic harmony and in general a peaceful environment for promoting socio-economic development. The basic sociopolitical problems that retarded economic growth and development of the entire country since independence continue unabatedly. The poor people are compelled to seek menial jobs outside the country to support their families. A sizeable proportion of the population still lives below the poverty line. The severity of the problems facing the entire nation is not realized by many citizens, while some in powerful positions have other urgent matters to attend.

The ongoing military operations are aimed at eliminating the LTTE now branded as terrorists by the Sri Lankan government. The rebel group remains banned in several countries including India. The fund raising activities of the front organizations are also banned now. There is now increasing realization among Tamils that both the aim and the violent methods of the Tamil Tigers used to gain control over the region claimed as the homeland of the Tamils are damaging to the future of Tamils in Sri Lanka. Although there is no fixed definition of terrorism, it certainly apples to acts of abduction, killing and threat directed at unarmed civilians by any armed group.

The targeting of unarmed Tamil civilians including politicians, professionals, aid workers, human rights defenders and journalists on the presumption they are potential terrorists or supporters of terrorism cannot be condoned as inevitable in the ‘war on terror.’ Following some civilian casualties inside rebel held territory the LTTE too accused the government forces of engaging in ‘terrorism’. The horrendous experience of former UNP Deputy Minister and Moneragala District Parliamentarian Jayasundara Wijeykoon who went missing for four days confirms the presence of different bands of terrorists. After his release from captivity he told the Daily Mirror from his Asiri Hospital bed on March 9 that the torture, death threats and other forms of intimidation he experienced was “yet another act of terrorism.” The intention of the gang was to force him admit connection with terrorists and having weapons. During the past two years, the majority of the victims of terrorism have been Tamil civilians. In most cases, the Tamil Tigers were not the culprits but others within and outside the defence establishment.

Inapt political system

In Sri Lanka, politics is largely a means to safeguard and serve the interests of the democratically elected government. Any one who has a liberal view becomes a traitor to the extremists. Jehan Perera, Executive Director of the National Peace Council in his weekly column in the Daily Mirror reported, while he was jogging in the park one early morning some one called him “traitor, traitor” His response in the same article was: “This was a person giving vent to a primeval passion.” He also observed: “The present period can be considered the worst ever in the post-independence history of Sri Lanka where it concerns a mutually acceptable solution to the ethnic conflict”. Those who make loud noises are ill informed bigoted persons with some grudge and/or seeking power by appealing to the people’s emotions. The shocking thing is the government is unconcerned about this development. Perhaps the leaders think this would help them in continuing speedily with their political agenda.

In the current context, patriotism means loyalty to the political cause of its advocates. It has no national significance, if the word ‘national’ means citizens of all ethnic communities in all parts of the country. It is not surprising there are many causes given that the Society is divided ethnically, regionally and politically. The divisions resulted from the inapt political system and the breed of leaders who came to the fore after independence mainly with short-term narrow interests. They did not have the conviction and the determination to act in the wide interest of all citizens and the long-term interest of the country. It is the reluctance to accept the concept of one democratic multi-ethnic society with equal rights for all citizens and the lack of political will and forward-thinking that has brought the country to the present tragic state.

The main weaknesses in the political system introduced by the narrow-minded leaders, who were concerned more about exercising political power for their benefit than for the well-being of the entire population, are now increasingly apparent following the present government’s tactical moves to consolidate and keep hold of governing power. The system is not suitable for observing good governance, the rule of law and nurturing an environment for peace and progress throughout the country. The system, as intended by the past leaders can be easily manipulated to protect or serve the current interests of the government.

Lack of political will and forward-thinking

The glaring contradictions between declared aims and subsequent actions or inaction have become intrinsic to the political process in Sri Lanka. In so far as the country and the disadvantaged people are concerned this is a vicious circle. The disappointments are not confined only to election promises. The non-implementation of many legislative Acts and official policies is also a part of the power-centered political process. Some were supposed to rectify the past mistakes but these remained uncorrected because of inaction. The damage to the unity, peace, stability and sustained development of the economy continued unabatedly. The amendment to the official language Act is a classic case of the indifference of political leadership. Tamil is also an official language only on paper.

After nearly 5 decades of teaching children exclusively in their mother tongue with Sinhala only as the official language, the importance of teaching in English not only science but also arts subjects has now been recognized. How soon and to want extent this will be implemented remains to be seen Children should definitely learn their own native languages but not at the cost of abandoning English widely accepted as an international language. It was blind nationalism that ignored the importance of learning a foreign language. Even the school curriculum was changed without foresight, ignoring the future of children in the new world. Changes in the local demand for different skills were also ignored. Vocational education did not get the importance it deserved. The tragedy was that the education system promoted divisions in the society. The importance of education in social advancement and national integration is well known. But this was overlooked by our political leaders. The country has a high literacy rate but this has not had much practical usefulness, especially in socio-economic development.

The Chief Justice Sarath N Silva, addressing the inaugural ceremony of the Law Students’ Union at the Law College auditorium on March 11 said that the Government, in 1956, made Sinhala the official Language within 24 hours. In the same manner, the English Language should once again be exalted to its earlier position. By making Sinhala the official language, hatred and enmity were spread among the Tamils and other ethnic groups, as they were not given their due place. There is increasing realization in some segments of the civil society that past policies have damaged the well-being of the people and the unity and advancement of the island nation but yet there is no political will to bring about the vitally needed changes.

The present muddled conditions in Sri Lanka with no sign of determined efforts to settle the Tamil problem permanently are apparent from the various groups operating outside the military establishment masquerading as patriots. The war itself has taken a different name as ‘war on terror’ and no one refers to it as Eelam war. This has dissuaded the international community from protesting against the war. The protest is against human rights violations. All sensible persons know there is no military solution to the ethnic problem and that a political settlement is necessary for lasting peace. Here too the lack of political will is delaying the process.

Almost every aspect of governance is politicized to further and protect the interests of those wielding power. The war has also helped to contain the discontent of the masses on the hardships they are experiencing as a result of rise in the prices of essential items. The current rate of inflation is over 20 per cent. The much touted 7.4 per cent growth rate is meaningless for the millions struggling to make ends meet. People also have difficulties with Grade I school admissions. Recently, school teachers went on strike and the Chief Justice expressed the view they deserve to be caned! School principals are reported to have taken bribes to admit children to their schools. Doctors and nurses too are protesting over their working conditions. In some purely administrative decisions that violated the fundamental rights of victims, redress was sought through the Supreme Court. Not all affected persons have the means to seek this remedy.

Another glaring weakness in decision-making at the Cabinet level is the failure to come up with balanced decisions on national issues taking into consideration the concerns and aspirations of all ethnic communities as well as the short-term and long-term gains and losses. The current scenario is different mainly because of the daring ways the damaging decisions are being made and the weak excuses given for changing the earlier positions or delaying the promised decisions. These were clearly evident in the work of the All Party Representative Committee (APRC) and the Expert Panel set up earlier to assist in preparing a set of proposals for constitutional reform aimed at settling permanently the protracted ethnic problem. While the APRC process was in progress, current needs of the President gained precedence over the political settlement of the national problem. The (majority) report of the Expert Panel was rejected and also that of the APRC Chairman that fused the recommendations in the majority and minority reports. It appears that the constitutional experts have no independent role in this process because of the altered decision to go for some political arrangement within the present divisive constitution.

Dr. Jayampathy Wickramaratne, who functioned as constitutional advisor in the Ministry of Constitutional Affairs and a member of the Expert Panel resigned from his government post earlier this month, saying the government has no intention of devolving power beyond what is possible under the present constitution-the 13th Amendment. He is reported (March 2) to have told the IANS correspondent P. K. Balachandran the 13th Amendment cannot be a solution to the ethnic question. This is also the view of the APRC chairman. Dr. Wickramaratne pointed out that only political will is required for its full implementation of 13th Amendment. The authority to implement came on the very day it became part of the Constitution. Although not stated specifically, what is possible now depends on the consent the Sinhala nationalists who are close to the President. This connection was evident from the anti-devolution stance of the Sinhala nationalist parties in the APRC and the subsequent decision of the President to stay within the 13th Amendment.
13th and 17th Amendments

Since 1972 when the first constitution of the Republic of Sri Lanka was adopted, democracy has been undermined mainly because of the absence of adequate checks and balances to ensure that the sovereign power of the people are used for their present and future well-being. These are also necessary for safeguarding human rights, minority rights, multi-ethnic and regional character of the nation and its unity. The effective functioning of democracy depends crucially on the restraints that prevent the abuse of the power of the people by their representatives in the government and their ill thought hasty decisions that would later harm any section of the society and/or the future of the country.

The democratic system of government differs fundamentally from dictatorship in that this system the supreme power of the people is exercised by their representatives chosen through the process of free and fair elections. Democratically elected government does not necessarily mean the government functions democratically. Democracy in government depends on ways decisions are made and implemented. Accountability is a basic requirement. The power of the people delegated to their representatives is for safeguarding their interests and striving towards meeting their needs and aspirations within a national frame. This is laid down by the country’s constitution. What happened in Sri Lanka after 1972 was the opposite. The 1972 and 1978 constitutions were drafted mainly from a partisan perspective to exercise power according to the political agendas of the then powerful leaders. Nevertheless any constitution after formal approval becomes the supreme law of the land. All persons elected or appointed to serve the country and the people as lawmakers, judicial officers or executives are legally obliged to act accordingly. The decision-makers have taken the oath of allegiance to the constitution which is a prerequisite for the assumption of power and responsibility. Power without responsibility exists only in the animal kingdom. One cannot take the oath excluding any amendment to the constitution. For example the sixth amendment was not supported by the Tamil political parties but it is accepted as part of the present constitution of Sri Lanka. The Tamil parliamentarians cannot claim they have taken the oath only for those provisions acceptable to them.

The JVP now says it does not accept the 13th Amendment as it was imposed under the 1987 Indo-Lanka Accord. The 38 JVP parliamentarians did not swear allegiance to the constitution sans the 13th Amendment. It is unclear whether the JVP’s opposition to devolution is intrinsic to their socialist ideology or a stratagem to win more votes. The President as head of the State, head of the government and head of the armed forces should be in the forefront leading the country according to the existing supreme law. If any part of the constitution is objectionable then suitable amendment should me made. Until such time this remains lawful and seeking the recommendation of a committee as well as soliciting the support of the main opposition party for implementing the 13th Amendment are unusual and unnecessary moves.

The interview with the APRC Chairman Prof. Tissa Vitharana (Sunday Observer 9 March 2008) gives an insight of the forces that have been hindering the task originally assigned to the Committee. Two remarks he made are relevant here.

(i) “The 1978 Constitution has led to a big gap between the people and the elected representatives. The situation what we are experiencing is a breakdown of proper governance because of the fault of the 1978 constitution”.

(ii) “As a socialist party they (JVP) should be for devolution. And it is only through devolution that we can give power to the people. If they are genuine they should support devolution. But look at what they are doing now. They are participating in the provincial councils and their members are enjoying the benefits of power that has been devolved to the provinces. If they are against this system they must withdraw from the provincial councils. So I cannot understand their logic of what they are doing and saying and also allegation that the whole process is done under the pressure of India”.

The JVP has taken a negative approach to achieve its political goal, similar to that of the LTTE except for the fact it abandoned violence after the tragic experiences of the early 70s and late 80s and joined the ongoing contest for power through the ballot. The electoral system is also flawed and does not serve democracy. There is no direct link between the parliamentarian and the people because of the district basis and the proportional system of selection. Responsibility to the electorate is also diffused.

Devolution of powers strengthens democracy especially in those cases where the power of the people is found to be not exercised uniformly for the benefit of the people in different regions according to their needs and aspirations. With devolved powers regional development will also be quicker and beneficial for the local residents. Regional development is generally a component of National development plans. The integration is done by the national commission in consultation with regional bodies. Thus both democracy and development processes are promoted by devolution. In the good old days, civics was taught in secondary schools as a separate subject. Students learned about the concept, principles and functioning of democracy. There is a case for including this subject in the school curriculum.

Dr. A. C. Visvalingam, President, Citizens’ Movement for Good Governance in his analysis–’Violating the Constitution’ (The Island 11 March 2008)-has described how the 17th Amendment originated and was unanimously approved. Successive Presidents unscrupulously exploited their powers under the 1978 Constitution to satisfy their highly personal agendas, creating serious apprehensions in the minds of concerned citizens. In the year 2000, a proactive group within the 35,000-strong Organisation of Professional Associations (OPA) decided that something should be done to curtail the misuse of political power bestowed to the Executive President. As a first step, the OPA drafted an amendment to the Constitution that would go some way to ensure only capable and honest persons would be appointed to all important State posts. This initiative was strongly resisted by many in Parliament but the JVP decided to back it and, to the surprise of all concerned. Parliament unanimously passed the 17th Amendment to the Constitution in 2001; it was a rather watered-down version of the OPA proposal but was, nevertheless, a giant step forward.

No problem was encountered in constituting the first ten-member Constitutional Council (CC) in 2002. The CC was able to recommend for appointment by the President many persons of good repute and distinction to the various national commissions such as the Public Service Commission and the Police Commission, but “President Kumaratunga thought nothing of violating the Constitution when she refused to appoint members to the Elections Commission because she objected to one of the names that were recommended, even though she did not have any right to do so.” Once the term of a majority of the members of the first CC came to an end, steps were initiated to appoint new members but no finality was achieved because the “minor” parties could not agree on who should be the tenth member. Despite much urging by worried citizens over the past two years and more for different reasons or rather lame excuses the CC has not been constituted. “President Rajapaksa has made full use of this unresolved impasse to pack the various Commissions which come under the aegis of the CC with persons whom he has personally selected, their main qualification being their expected willingness to do whatever the President wants them to do”.

Now, there is a move to modify the 17th Amendment to suit the present government’s interests. The same approach to constitution making taken in 1972 and 1978 continues even after the disastrous experience of the past many decades that deprived peace, progress and prosperity to the country and the vast majority of her citizens. Apparently, there is absolutely no sense of urgency for those whose main interest is political power; they are engrossed in playing their usual game while the nation is proverbially burning.

At least there has been some foresight in anticipating this kind of eventuality. This is evident from Article 35 (l) of the Constitution which Dr. Visvalingam has aptly cited. It states: “While any person holds office as President, no proceedings shall be instituted or continued against him in any court or tribunal in respect of anything done or omitted to be done by him either in his official or private capacity”. Does the word ‘anything’ in the Article include violation of the constitution? All patriotic persons meaning devotion to the country and not some chauvinistic cause know that the present constitution is a major obstacle to stability, unity, peace and national development. Only the daydreamers will hope the politicians on their own initiative will jointly decide to make fundamental changes to the present divisive constitution.

Agitation of civil society groups

Sri Lankan civil society groups have warned that the government’s contempt for the Constitution and the rule of law could result in isolation by the donor community causing considerable economic hardship. There is the concern that the country is sliding down towards anarchy. The culture of violence with impunity has grown very fast with State patronage. The erosion of democratic and civil values is apparent to any normal person.

The head of the Organisation of Professional Associations (OPA) said the way established norms of good governance were being ignored and the interference with anti-corruption institutions augured ill for the future. The Sri Lankan branch of Transparency International, warned that the government was becoming increasing intolerant of criticism and was heading towards a dictatorship. Head of the Citizens Movement for Good Governance said “President Rajapaksa was acting in ‘complete contempt’ for the people by blocking attempts to activate independent institutions and interfering with the Bribery Commission by removing its director general for no valid reason.” The Free Media Movement said it was the government’s own abuse of power and disregard for the rule of law that was bringing Sri Lanka into disrepute internationally and not criticism of such abuses by civil society groups.

The Centre for Policy Alternatives has also warned that the government’s abuse of power could endanger critical economic concessions won from western governments giving access to their markets. The European Union’s GSP Plus scheme under which clothing, a key Sri Lankan export, and a host of other products, get duty free access is coming up for renewal by the end of 2008 and “the main requirement for Sri Lanka is to ratify and implement 27 international treaties, the main one being the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights”. Although Sri Lanka is a signatory to these treaties, none have been sufficiently implemented. (Source: LBO report 5 March 2008-Sri Lanka drifting towards dictatorship: civil society). All concerned citizens must be anxiously waiting for the next move by civil society groups to save the country from another national disaster. Sri Lanka is already on the verge of being categorized as a failed state and unless steps are taken to reverse the present trend the country will soon be in this group.

[The writer is Former Additional Deputy Secretary to the Treasury, Sri Lanka and UN Advisor, Development Economics/Planning]

Western Peoples Front Leader and Civil Monitoring Commission Convener Mano Ganesan MP met with visiting officials of the European Commission’s office of the external relations Director-General, Ms. Helen Campbell and Andrea Nicolaj yesterday (14th March) at the EU premises in Colombo.

Mano Ganesan MP told the visiting EU officials that Sri Lanka Government’s proposals to establish a new IIGEP with eminent persons drawn from SAARC countries, is merely a time buying exercise. “We reject the new government proposals as another set of ploy to buy time. We are compelled to take this stand as we have gone through many committees and commissions and many state agencies established by this government in the name combating human rights violations”, says a statement issued by the office of Mano Ganesan MP.

Ms. Campbell is the head of the EC’s unit overseeing Sri Lanka and other south Asian countries except India. Andrea Nicolaj is in-charge of the relations with Sri Lanka. Both represented the External Relations Directorate-General of the European Commission.

Media communique issued after the meeting from Mano Ganesan’s office further said:

Discussions centered on the prevailing political and human rights conditions in the country. CMC Convener Mano Ganesan explained to the officials that now the government is coming out with proposals to establish a parliamentary select committee on Human Rights and a new IIGEP with eminent persons drawn from SAARC countries. This is in view of the withdrawal of the IIGEP and the increasing concern on the deplorable human rights conditions in the country and subsequent demand for meaningful international participation in monitoring human rights abuses in Sri Lanka.

We reject the new government proposals as another set of ploy to buy time. We are compelled to take this stand as we have gone through many committees and commissions and many state agencies established by this government in the name combating human rights violations. The long list begins with the formal National Human Rights Commission, the Mahanama Tilakaratne Commission, the Special Presidential Commission, the IIGEP and a government Ministerial committee. In addition there are the special police units and the Ministry for human rights. None of these have helped to improve the human rights conditions in this country.

Retired Judge Mahanama Tilakaratne supposed to have handed over his report to the government. But it has not been made public despite our repeated demands to do so. We have noted a tone of deliberate attempt in the comments made by Mahanama Tilakaratne. He puts the domestic disappearances and the systematic enforced disappearances together and narrates the story of ‘missing people returning home and going abroad’. This is to deceive the nation and the international community.

The most worrying factor is the enormous level of the culture of impunity prevailing in this country. This government is yet to come out with name of one single person who is arrested, indicted, charge sheeted and sentenced in view of the large number of incidents of abuses we are witnessing on a daily basis.

Talking of a new South Asia (SAARC) based IIGEP is pathetic because the withdrawing IIGEP is headed by respectable Indian retired judge Mr. Bhagawati. There was another eminent member from Bangladesh too. It appears that human rights minister Mahinda Samarasinghe is not accustomed to the ground situation and lost directions in this all important human issue.

The credible steps that the government could take at this juncture begin with the establishment of the constitutional commission. The opposition parties and the OPA are for this move. This will pave way for the independent commissions. It will be a step in the right path. But the victims of the human rights abuses will not be satisfied with this move alone. It is an urgent immediate necessity that the office of the UN Human Rights Commissioner in Sri Lanka is strengthened with field presence covering both territories controlled by GoSL and LTTE.

The issue of the personal security for Mano Ganesan MP was also discussed at the meeting.

Related: Eminent Persons Group Quits Monitoring Presidential Commission Inquiry

by Col R Hariharan (retd.)

The European Union’s decision to renew the Generalized System of Preferences (GSP) plus scheme provided for Sri Lanka’s exports for another three years from January 2009, despite its adverse reaction to the ending of the ceasefire agreement (CFA) by Sri Lanka government. (The GSP plus concession enables Sri Lanka to export its goods and products to the EU at reduced or exempted tax and duty levies.) This decision comes in the face of strong stand taken by Germany on this issue. In an interview published on February 9 Heidemarie Wieczorek-Zeul, German Minister for Economic Cooperation and Development, had said that if Sri Lanka continued with the military option without seeking credible political solution to the conflict in Sri Lanka she would demand the EU to withdraw the GSP offered to Sri Lanka.

This clearly illustrated the ambivalence between thought and action that underlines the response of international community in responding to contentious issues. This applies not only to the Sri Lanka issue, but many other similar global issues.

There has been widespread international concern at the growing human rights violations and disregard for humanitarian concerns in Sri Lanka ever since the security forces went on the offensive against in December 2005. Sri Lanka’s reluctance to allow international involvement in either monitoring or improving the Human Rights situation has not endeared it to other nations even while the CFA was in force. This concern has been compounded by major escalation in the Eelam war-4 resulting in heavy loss of life since then. Moreover, the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE) response to the security forces offensive with series of blasts and killings targeting civilians in the south has further compounded international concerns over the Sri Lanka war.

Undoubtedly these developments have disappointed friendly nations who had put their time and resources in giving form and content to the now defunct peace process 2002. With the security forces on the threshold of the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE) heartland in the north, the battle would only intensify further, choking the hopes of reviving international mediation process for bringing peace, perhaps irrevocably.

Apart from the four co-chairs of Tokyo Donors Conference ? the EU, Japan, Norway and the U.S., India, Canada and the UK have consistently shown great interest in helping Sri Lanka resolve the Tamil issue peacefully. Though their reaction to the Sri Lankan walkout from the CFA varied, their response had two common elements: regret at the government decision to withdraw from the CFA and a reminder that Sri Lanka could resolve the issue not merely by military means but with a political package on devolution. Despite such clarity on basic issues, international community’s future course of action in respect of Sri Lanka’s active pursuit of war will be conditioned by their national self interest.

India as a major regional power has its own equation with other members of the Tokyo Donors Conference and other western powers. India – Sri Lanka relation is unique due to closeness geographical, cultural and trade interests. It has its own coordinates, conditioned by many geo-strategic issues. Among these India’s interest in ensuring smooth resolution of the problem of Sri Lanka Tamils so that it does not affect the peace and tranquillity in both countries is an important one. So study of India’s response to Sri Lanka war comes under a category different from other countries.

The LTTE’s dependence upon its global support network of Sri Lanka Tamil expatriates to progress the war in Sri Lanka has inevitably drawn it within the ambit of the U.S-led global war on terror. At the same time, it also served as incentive for the international community led by power centres from three continents ? the U.S., the EU, Japan (and Norway representing the peace lobbies) ? take a lead in gilding a Sri Lanka peace package with developmental finance as incentive. As a result the Sri Lanka government and the LTTE agreed upon the CFA and the Norwegian mediated peace process in 2002. India dogged by the ghosts of its bitter experience at peace making in Sri Lanka in the past tacitly agreed to the mediation “intrusion” by external players, in what it had considered as its own domain of power. However, the large scale violation of the ceasefire by the LTTE till December 2005 and by the Sri Lanka government as well thereafter has probably led to the disillusionment of the four co-chairs with both the Sri Lanka government and the LTTE.

The demise of the peace process has also resulted in the dismantling of the international structural assets painfully built to moderate and monitor the peace process. Along with that, much of the Lanka-friendly attitudes of nations actively involved in the peace process are also eroded.

If international understanding of the Sri Lanka government’s stand on ending the ceasefire is interpolated on a scale of 1 to 9, India and Japan with a score of 6 show a close understanding. At the same time, they have made clear that military solution alone was unworkable. Both have tended to play down Sri Lanka’s performance on human rights issues and do not air their views freely in public. They are unlikely to go along with international of collective action, if any, to coerce Sri Lanka government to improve human rights. However, they are likely to support any persuasive measures for producing the same results. The same applies to resumption of peace negotiations also.

On the other hand, the U.S. (with a score of 5) has shown a keen understanding of the Sri Lankan stand than the rest. The U.S. has stressed the need for the government to come out with a devolution package for Tamils without further delay. The U.S. has also put some riders on future aid and military assistance till Sri Lanka mends its dismal human rights record. At the same time these actions were balanced with other acts or statements to soften the impact. For instance the Federal Bureau of Investigations (FBI) issued a statement terming the LTTE as the most dreaded role model of Al Qaeda almost at the same time as the U.S. issued a statement critical of the Sri Lanka government for abandoning the CFA. We can expect the U.S. to continue this carefully tailored approach in Sri Lanka. While the U.S. has a fairly good understanding of the Tamil quest for equal rights, it neither condones nor supports the LTTE, which has been representing the Tamil interests in the peace process. So it will continue to cooperate with the government in Sri Lanka while supporting the resumption of peace parleys. At best, the U.S. would pitch more forcefully to sponsor the presence of a UN Human Rights watchdog at Colombo.

The UK, with the same score of 5 as the U.S., appears to be slightly better nuanced in its approach than other EU members. However, the large and influential Tamil expatriate lobby in the UK is already bringing considerable political pressures on the ruling party to make the government policy more sensitive and considerate to the Tamil struggle for equity. When the elections get closer this could generate more positive action than issuing palliative statements on Sri Lanka Tamils. This could result in bringing more pressure upon Sri Lanka government.

The EU with 4 points and Norway at 3 points have shown strong resentment of Sri Lanka’s disdain for international concerns on ending the CFA and on its deteriorating human rights record. They have been strident in the UN in their demand for structural and qualitative improvement on the Human Rights front in Sri Lanka. They are likely to keep up pressure on this question, diplomatically and in public, both within and outside the UN. However, internally the EU members have their own differing perceptions on the overall situation in Sri Lanka. These will condition their behaviour and prescription on any proposal for collective action.

Canada appears to figure somewhere between the EU and Norway. It is driven both by local political considerations where Tamils have a strong say, and the opposing stands taken by the ruling party and the opposition on the LTTE’s war. Unlike its predecessor, the present government in Canada is strongly opposed to terrorism of the LTTE kind and had been fully cooperating with the U.S. in its actions against the LTTE. Without loud statements such actions by Canada are likely to continue. At the same time, Canada has equally strong stand on human rights issues in conformity with that of the EU.

The attitudes of China and Pakistan to Sri Lanka have been largely conditioned by considerations of strategic security, trade and geo-politics. Their interest lies in creating their own special space in Sri Lanka’s policy horizon. China would like to establish a strategic foothold in Sri Lanka beyond security orientation relating to India. Probably Chinese interests are focused on the larger canvass of Indian Ocean security. China would continue to maintain and enlarge upon the existing goodwill between the two countries through improved commercial relations and armament sales. While India with its geographical and cultural closeness would always have an advantage in its relations with Sri Lanka, Sri Lanka would like to use the competitive nature of the India-China relations to gain maximum advantage for its own benefit.

In the case of Pakistan, the interest is more oriented to South Asia focusing on India’s increasing assertion in the region and Asia. Many Sri Lankans perceive Pakistan as a friend particularly on occasions when India had not been helpful in issues impinging upon the Tamil conflict. While this attitude may not be a great advantage in building better trade relations between Sri Lanka and Pakistan, it is handy for Sri Lanka in its current phase of war to source arms supply from Pakistan. Sri Lanka’s increasingly close relationship with India makes it a unique listening post for Pakistan’s India operations. And Pakistan will continue to take full advantage of its relations with Sri Lanka to exploit this unique status of Sri Lank.

Thus both China and Pakistan have identified themselves completely with the actions of the Sri Lanka government. By doing this without any “suspicious agenda” from Sri Lanka’s point of view, Sri Lanka’s relationship with both these countries is likely to flourish. Of course, political and geo-strategic constraints on Sri Lanka over such a growth will always be there.

Attitude towards the LTTE

The LTTE has been finding it hard to reconcile itself to the fall in international esteem ever since it walked out of the peace process. Its continued refusal to read the changing international mood and come to terms with reality was evident from its statement on the CFA even as early as February 22, 2007. It said “It (the CFA) recognised Tamil Eelam’s de facto existence, with its unique characteristics; a distinct population; a government comprising a defence force, a police force, a judiciary, a civil administration and other institutions for effective governance of a people, and capability of entering into agreements with other governments, with a line of control reflecting the ground reality of the existence of the Tamil homeland demarcated with recognised borders. The CFA recognised the balance of power between the GOSL (Government of Sri Lanka) and the LTTE, and was premised on this balance of power?” However, its intention to resume the war of secession made in the same statement has not helped nations like Norway and the EU which had tried to revive the peace process.

This attitudinal rigidity coupled with its renewed violent actions against civilian targets well outside its beat after the end of the CFA is probably an important consideration in shaping international lack of interest in the LTTE’s style of fighting for Tamil rights. The LTTE’s political head B Nadesan’s grandiose claim “we are a conventional force. We will launch attacks on military targets but we will not target civilians,” even as its bomb squads started hitting civilian targets served only to increase the gap in LTTE’s international credibility. So when Nadesan addressed a letter to the UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon indicating the readiness of the LTTE to adhere by the CFA scrupulously it made no impact.

The LTTE argument that the only “path open to regain the rights of the Tamil people” was through recognition of the sovereignty of the Tamil nation particularly after being a party to the demise of the CFA and peace process will find few takers internationally. With the continued identification of the LTTE as a part of the global terror regimes, the militant group is likely to find it has less and less freedom to operate outside Sri Lanka in the coming months.

In a nut shell

In concrete terms, the international community is not likely to take any major collective action against Sri Lanka unless they are involved in yet another peace process for which the chances are slim. At the same time, reasons of real politick are likely to discourage collective responsibility of the kind they had shown in 2002-03 that culminated in the peace process, unless both Sri Lanka and the LTTE agree to fully cooperate to ensure success of such an initiative.

Tamil expatriates, who appear to put too much faith in international action in Sri Lanka to force the government to give up the military option and revive the peace process, would do well to remember this. And probably they will have to persuade India to prevail upon Sri Lanka to effect any change because it stands outside the internationally networked stand on this issue. India is in no mood or under compulsion to do this at present for its own reasons. What India can do to make it a win-win situation for all in Sri Lanka requires a more detailed examination because it depends upon what the LTTE, the Tamil expatriates, the people, politicians and the Sri Lanka government should do to help themselves.

So the light at the end of the tunnel is still not visible because the tunnel has not ended. And that is a tragedy for the people of Sri Lanka and all other stakeholders including the international community. [saag]

(Col R Hariharan, a retired Military Intelligence specialist on South Asia, served with the Indian Peace Keeping Force in Sri Lanka as Head of Intelligence. He is associated with the South Asia Analysis Group and the Chennai Centre for China Studies. E-Mail: colhari@yahoo.com)

Six people affiliated with the Sri Lankan news Web site OutreachSL have been detained by the Terrorist Investigation Division of the Sri Lankan police force in Colombo since last week, according to Agence France-Presse and local news reports. The Committee to Protect Journalists urges the government of Sri Lanka to charge these Journalists and media workers or release them from police custody.

“The detention of these journalists and media workers is troubling,” said CPJ Executive Director Joel Simon. “The Sri Lankan government must clarifywhy they are being held and either charge them or release them immediately. The fact that four of them are Tamil journalists and media
workers is an indicator of how vulnerable this group is to harassment by
the Sri Lankan authorities.”

The six individuals, including journalists, editorial, and management staff of the multimedia news Web site OutreachSL, were detained separately between Thursday and Saturday last week, according to local press freedom group the Free Media Movement (FMM).

The six have not appeared in court, and it is not clear if they have been allowed access to legal council, FMM spokesman Sunanda Deshapriya told
CPJ.

Three journalists, OutreachSL editor J.S. Tissanayagam, who also writes a column for Sri Lankan weekly The Sunday Times; S. Ranga, a photographer; and K. Wijesingha, a video cameraman for the Web site, were among the detained, according to The Sunday Times Web site. First names were not reported.

A fourth journalist, the Web site’s visual editor who was identified only as Udayanan, was also arrested on Friday, according to Deshapriya and the Tamil nationalist Web site TamilNet.

Two others, N. Jasiharan, who manages OutreachSL and owns a printing business, and his wife Valarmathi, were detained on Thursday night, Deshapriya told CPJ. TamilNet reported that Valarmathi is a management trainee with the independently owned Sri Lankan MTV news and entertainment television network.

Wijesingha and Udayanan are ethnic Sinhalese; the other four are Tamil, according to Deshapriya.

According to police records obtained by the FMM, Jasiharan is being investigated for links to the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam, Deshapriya said. The records said the other five had been detained for questioning, he said.

OutreachSL, a news Web site, is not known for controversial reporting. It is not clear what sparked the detentions, Deshapriya told CPJ. A journalist based in Colombo who declined to be identified told CPJ that Tissanayagam’s Times column, “Telescope,” offered a Tamil viewpoint of
current affairs and was sometimes critical of the government.

Deputy Inspector General W. Prathapasinghe confirmed the arrests on Sunday, according to The Sunday Times. CPJ calls and e-mails to police in Colombo were not immediately returned.

Another FMM spokesman, S. Sivakumar, who edits the bimonthly Tamil magazine Sarinihar-which is printed by Jasiharan’s printing company E-Kwality-was also detained for nearly 12 hours on Saturday, Deshapriya told CPJ. Police visited Sivakumar’s office on Saturday morning and held his cousin there until Sivakumar arrived and agreed to be taken in for
questioning, Deshapriya said.

The Free Media Movement and The Sunday Times reported that the detentions were made under emergency regulations. Sri Lanka’s August 2005 emergency regulations allow detentions of up to 12 months without charge, while some provisions of the longstanding Prevention of Terrorism Act, which were re-enacted in December 2006, allow for 18-month detentions.

Families of the detained had not yet been given detention orders for their relatives, Deshapriya said.

(CPJ is a New York–based, independent, nonprofit organization that works to safeguard press freedom worldwide. For more information, visit www.cpj.org).

Reporters Without Borders is concerned about the fate of five Tamil journalists arrested by anti-terrorist police in Colombo in the past six days and urges the Sri Lankan authorities to explain why they are being held.

“The anti-terrorist police are accusing the journalists of receiving money from the Tamil Tiger rebels, but after investigating, we can confirm that the funds in question came from a German foundation and from Tamil exiles,” the press freedom organisation said. “We condemn the fact the some of these journalists were badly beaten during their first few days in detention, and that this was clearly done to extract confessions from them.”

The funds received by two of the journalists, V. Jasikaran and J.S. Tissanayagam, were to finance the Outreach (outreachlk.wordpress.com) website and to help Tamil students. An official with the German foundation FLICT told Reporters Without Borders that Tissanayagam, Outreach’s editor, received 12,000 euros in November as part of this initiative.

Several other sources told Reporters Without Borders that Jasikaran received money from members of the Tamil exile community in Germany to help students in the east of the island.

The owner of the E-Kwality printing works and a writer known for his Tamil nationalist stance, Jasikaran was arrested in Colombo on 6 March. His computer and printing equipment were seized, and his wife, a TV producer, was also detained.

Tissanayagam, who writes for the Sunday Times newspaper as well as editing Outreach, was arrested by anti-terrorist police on 7 March. Reporter Kithsiri Wijesinghe, photographer Gayan Lasantha Ranga and video director Udayanan were arrested later the same day.

Journalist S. Sivakumar, the spokesman of the Free Media Movement, was detained for a few hours on 8 March in connection with the same case. He has been ordered to present himself to the police again.

____________
Vincent Brossel
Asia-Pacific Desk
Reporters Sans Frontis
47 rue Vivienne
75002 Paris
33 1 44 83 84 70
33 1 45 23 11 51 (fax)
asia@rsf.org
www.rsf.org

by Dr. Rajasingham Narendran

“For what is a man profited, if he shall gain the whole world, and lose his own soul? (Mathew 16:26)

Sri Lanka, as we call her today, is an ancient land with an unfathomable history stretching into the mists of time. The attempt to understand her history, beyond the past few centuries, would be akin to the efforts of the proverbial five blind men to figure out an elephant. Sri Lanka, a tropical isle with plenty of rainfall, a hot and humid climate, and teaming with all sorts of creeping and crawling life, makes preserving ten-year-old books difficult even in modern homes! One need not stretch imagination far to accept that much of what were written on Ola-manuscipts in ancient and medieval times has been irretrievably lost. Only rock inscriptions and these too in sheltered locations would have survived the ravages of climate. Buildings made of clay, wood and leaves are prone to destruction within a short time by the combined effects of climate, termites and ants. Pottery or parts thereof, on which ancient alphabets and insignia have been found, also contribute to our attempt to decipher history. Further, with the practice of cremating the dead probably stretching back into our very early history, it is unlikely sufficient evidence will be found to prove any hypothesis as to the origin or antiquity of our people. A few burial sites where urns with human ashes and some artefacts were found in Sri Lanka and South India, point to possible common cultural roots.

Alex Haley in the introduction to his monumental book ‘Roots’ states, “Finally, I acknowledge immense debt to the griots (traditional storytellers) of Africa-where today it is rightly said that when a griot dies, it is as if a library has burned to the ground. The griots symbolize how all human ancestry goes back to some place, and some time, where there was no writing. Then, the memories and the mouths of ancient elders was the only way that early histories of mankind got passed along…. for all of us today to know who we are.” The oral tradition of transmitting the story of our history persisted over thousands of years, until attempts were made to consolidate them into writing. The oral tradition of transmitting history is of course prone to inaccuracies, exaggerations, distortions and manipulations.

In Sri Lanka, rock inscriptions and Ola-manuscripts recording the efforts of kings, priests and poets of old, are the peepholes available for us to get a glimpse into a very hazy past. In areas with no rock formations geographically, rock inscriptions were not possible, and this create a void while trying to gain an insight into ancient history. The written material available from the distant past and the stories conveyed downstream through the millennia are also likely to be unreliable, except as general pointers to how we progressed with time. Those who wrote on Ola-leaves or inscribed on rocks, may have been influenced by their own social and political compulsions. The need to glorify what they sympathized with and damn what they disliked, would have been as compelling in the past, as it is now. Our attempts to glimpse into our distant history can be only guesswork at worst and as good as the scientific tools available at best. Despite the availability of the best scientific tools, interpretations are more often than not, yet dictated by social and political compulsions.

It is a tragedy that we the component peoples of Sri Lanka, particularly the Sinhalese and Tamils, are yet involved in the debate as to who amongst us are the original inhabitants and the legitimate owners of the island. Into this meaningless, but all consuming political debate, over which a civil war is being waged, the debate on which language-Sinhalese or Tamil, is older has also been joined. Very few have paused to question how relevant such disputes and debates are to our national life and future as peoples.

Minister Champika Ranawake of the JVP has recently claimed that the, “Sinhala language is older than Indian languages with a history of more than 3000 years.” This takes the debate to encompass the Indian subcontinent and beyond the shores of Sri Lanka. If this was true, I will be proud to know one of the oldest languages in the world and share the island with a people speaking that language. Unfortunately, coming from the mouth of a man, who considers all Tamils in Sri Lanka as aliens and intruders, and would prefer them dumped en-masse into the deep sea, I set out to investigate the veracity of his claim and hence the origins of the written scripts of Sinhala and Tamil and their relationship to other languages in the region. I approached this project as an inquisitive layman. I stand to be corrected by trained linguists, etymologists and archeologists, if I am wrong in what I have understood from my efforts.

Brahmi is considered the parent script for most languages used in India, Sri Lanka, Nepal, Burma, Bali, Java, Thailand and even Laos. The origins of Brahmi are yet subject to much debate. Whether it originated from a script used in the Indus Valley civilization of old, an Aramaic script introduced from the Middle East or evolved independently from within India, is yet a subject of much debate. Brahmi itself is of two types-the Southern Brahmi and a Northern Brahmi. The Southern Brahmi is considered the parent alphabet of languages such as Tamil, Malayalam, Telugu, Kannada, Sinhala, Burminese, Thai, Lao, Balinese, Javanese and others of a similar nature. The Northern Brahmi is the parent for the Nagari type of script as in Sanskrit, Hindi, Gujarati, Bengali, Assamese, Oriya, Nepali and Tibetan. The Northern Brahmi is also called the Asokan Brahmi.

Further, whether the Southern and Northern types of Brahmi, independently evolved, or whether one of these was the parent of the other is the subject of much debate. The Brahmi that gave birth to the Tamil script has been called Tamil Brahmi or Tamili/Demali and that which gave rise to the Sinhala script is called the Sinhala Brahmi. The Brahmi alphabet and the differences between Asokan and Southern (Tamil) Brahmi are pictorially presented below. How closely Asokan and Tamil Brahmi (Southern Brahmi) resemble each other is noteworthy. In a history of a people spanning several millennia, would a few centuries or even a thousand years difference in the perceived origin of their languages make any meaningful difference?

The depictions (Pic-3, Pic-4) present how the Tamil Vatteluthu (Rounded alphabets)-a progenitor of modern Tamil alphabet-and the Sinhala alphabet in its various evolutionary forms compare with each other:

Brahmi script has been identified as having appeared by the 5th century BC. Brahmi was the most common script used by King Asoka who ruled between 269-232 BC. Brahmi inscriptions belonging to Asoka’s period have been found in rock shelters in Sri Lanka. The language used in the Brahmi inscriptions of Sri Lanka and those of Asoka is Prakrit-a colloquial form of Sanskrit. The inscriptions using Brahmi characters have also been discovered in Tamil Nadu rock shelters and pottery fragments. The earliest language used is Tamil with a mixture of Prakrit words. Scripts earlier than Tamil-Brahmi have not been so far discovered in Tamil Nadu. The Sinhala alphabet has been identified as appearing in rock inscriptions during the 3rd and 2nd century B.C. Both the alphabet and language have changed considerably since then and the earliest surviving Sinhala literature dates from the 9th century AD. A broken jar with Tamil Brahmi inscriptions found in Quseir-al-Qadim, an ancient Red Sea port in Egypt, has been dated to the first century BC. The earliest Tamil epigraphic records have been estimated to be around 300 BC.

An intermediary alphabet that evolved from the ancient Brahmi is Grantham, which has influenced most South Indian and Sri Lankan languages including Sinhala and Tamil.

The comparison between the Grantham alphabet, Malayalam, Sinhalese and Tamil is given in (Pic-6, Pic-7):

It should be also noted ‘Elu’ is an ancient form of the Sinhala language, from which the modern vernacular has been derived. Elu is thought to be an older form of Sinhala by many, and a type of Prakrit by others. Organizations such as ‘Hela Havula’ consider Elu entirely native to Sri Lanka. There are also Tamil scholars who consider Elu to be an ancient form of Tamil. The modern alphabets of various languages currently in use in India and Sri Lanka are presented below to once again show resemblances that point to common origins:

Tamil and Sinhala, as languages have also been identified as sharing more than 4000 words and have an almost similar grammatical structure. I was surprised to hear the word ‘Thooral’ referring to a drizzle in Tamil being used in the Wattala area by Sinhalese with reference to rain. Similarly in the Negombo area, ants are referred to as ‘Sithraam Pootchi’ (Poochi-insect in Tamil), by many Sinhalese. While the Sinhalese can justifiably claim a large number of Sinhala words are used in Tamil, Tamils could also in turn justifiably claim that a large number of Tamil words are used in Sinhala. What appears reasonable in a historic context is that both Tamils and Sinhalese have much in common because of their common origins as peoples and the common origins of their languages.

Evolution whether biological, cultural or linguistic is an ever diverging process. The diversity when traced back, only points to a less divergent past and if can be traced far enough, to common origins. Every person, tribe, nation or race can claim to a pre-eminent place in matters pertaining to language, culture, religion and even biological make-up, and rightly so, because we have a common origin. Evolution guarantees that we try to unconsciously preserve what we are familiar with, through a sense of pride, which ensures diversity within our essential unity. However, evolution ensures that we keep on changing slowly and steadily with time biologically and in all other aspects relating to life, to ensure that we are fit to survive. We are all essentially the same in all aspects relating to our lives, while appearing and even trying to be different. This is the unity in our diversity. Language is only a tool for communication, and with time evolved into a medium to express our thoughts, deeds and culture. Languages have been grouped into families based on their similarities and I am sure evolved, as I had referred to in my last column and if the theory of evolution and anthropologic findings prove correct, from a primordial form of language spoken somewhere in Africa-probably a primordial form of Bantu.

The Sinhalese and Tamils have to take the giant step towards the future and cease to dwell morbidly in the past, however much we believe it was glorious. Life in the past-ancient and the middle-ages-was a mixture of what it is today-good, bad and the ugly. It could not have been otherwise. It is the propensity for us as humans to remember the good and forget the bad. If not, we could not have survived as a species this long. If not, we would have drowned in our grief a long time back in our evolutionary history. It is our politicians, for their pecuniary needs and desire for power, who keep glorifying the past to make us forget the present-a rather undesirable reality of their making.

In biology, with reference to our embryological development it is said ‘Ontogeny recapitulates phylogeny’-our embryological development is a repeat of our evolutionary development as a species. Life is supposed to have originated in the seas and we as embryos develop in the womb as an entity floating in fluids. This is one aspect of the above concept. Similarly in life, ‘Where we go in the future is determined by where we have been in the past.’ While we have to carry our collective experiences as a people and as individuals, from the past into the future; we should not try to go back into the past.

Sri Lanka, is yet unfortunately a captive of its past and is unable to develop the dynamics to break out of this imprisonment, because of the efforts of our unsavoury politicians and noisy societal leadership. The antiquity of the languages we owe allegiance, the religions we profess and the history we claim as a people, are over-burdening our politics in a manner that is preventing us from becoming what we are capable of. The search Champika Ranawake set me has of course shown me he may be right in claiming Sinhala is 3000 years old, but he was wrong in asserting it is older than any language in India. Tamil is as old, if not older than Sinhala. This interesting experience made me gain greater insight into human evolution and see the merit in the pride different people feel about their respective identities! It is unfortunate, the facts that could be garnered to stress our essential unity, are being mustered by our politicians with great vigour to foster dissention, violence and bloodshed in Sri Lanka.