Thursday Apr 25, 2024
Thursday Apr 25, 2024
Friday, 21 February 2014 00:00 - - {{hitsCtrl.values.hits}}
suffered immensely. Massive bomb attacks, deliberate acts of mass killings, abductions, and kidnappings, were carried out by the LTTE with impunity and with regular frequency; political and civil leaders, thousands of members of the Armed Forces of both Sri Lanka and India, clergymen, children and innocent bystanders were brutally targeted; properties worth hundreds of millions of dollars were damaged and/or destroyed; hundreds of millions of dollars were raised openly in many Northern American and Western capitals to purchase arms and to fund the terror activities in Sri Lanka; Tamil children from the north and east of Sri Lanka were recruited and made to fight as child soldiers.
All that while, the OHCHR and certain countries of the international community were deafeningly silent, or were lukewarm in their comments against the LTTE. Although some governments took the legal step of proscribing the LTTE, they turned a blind eye to the massive LTTE fund raising operation that was taking place on their own soils.
‘Technical advice’
As a result, throughout the difficult three decades that Sri Lanka struggled to face the never-ending terrorist threats which deprived all Sri Lankans of their human rights, especially their right to life, none of the current international agencies that are presently eagerly offering ‘technical advice’ offered any serious advice as to how to stop the LTTE terror machine. Neither did they offer any ‘technical advice’ as to how to curb the LTTE’s covert and overt funding operations.
However, no sooner the conflict ended, and as a consequence the guns and bombs fell silent, and the people of Sri Lanka particularly those in the north commenced normal life without the threat of terrorism, the OHCHR and certain North American and Western nations woke up from their deep slumber, and have been eager to offer ‘technical advice’ to the Government and people of Sri Lanka.
In fact, they have now even gone to the extent of ‘advising’ as to what new laws must be enacted or what existing laws must be repealed by the sovereign Parliament of Sri Lanka, and also to proffer ‘technical advice’ to bring their ‘brand’ of ‘reconciliation and accountability’ in Sri Lanka.
In that context, the people in Sri Lanka would surely be forgiven if they were to think that ‘technical advice,’ if any, should have been first offered when Sri Lanka was suffering from the terrible effects of raw and undiluted terrorism, and not now when Sri Lanka has eliminated terrorism and created a nation that is enjoying peace.
The LTTE terror, mayhem and overseas funding operations never figured seriously in the OHCHR agenda, prior to 2009. Even in the few instances that the issue surfaced, the UN or the particular members of the international community who are vociferous in raising issues regarding Sri Lanka today, failed to offer or provide any ‘technical advice,’ at least to the extent of stopping the funding of terror that was taking place with impunity in some of their countries.
"Throughout the difficult three decades that Sri Lanka struggled to face the never-ending terrorist threats which deprived all Sri Lankans of their human rights, especially their right to life, none of the current international agencies that are presently eagerly offering ‘technical advice’ offered any serious advice as to how to stop the LTTE terror machine. Neither did they offer any ‘technical advice’ as to how to curb the LTTE’s covert and overt funding operations
Notwithstanding the apathy on the part of the OHCHR and certain countries and other international agencies, Sri Lanka was fortunately able to successfully eliminate terrorism. Sri Lanka was also able to thereafter initiate vast development programs in the former conflict areas, which have so far, paved the way for the people whose livelihoods were affected due to terrorism, to regain their lost human rights and to find ways and means to rebuild their lives. As a result, Sri Lanka is now well on the path to reconciliation between the communities
The OHCHR must, at least as this late stage, also realise that ‘reconciliation’ is a relative concept, and that the process must necessarily be carried out at a pace and in a framework that the body politic of the particular country could absorb. It cannot also be ‘imposed’ from outside according to a foreign timetable, or decree. Such formulae almost always end in disaster, and when that happens, it is not the ‘technical advisors’ who suffer, but the people of the country that has been subjected to the process driven by outside forces"
Path to reconciliation
Notwithstanding the apathy on the part of the OHCHR and certain countries and other international agencies, Sri Lanka was fortunately able to successfully eliminate terrorism. Sri Lanka was also able to thereafter initiate vast development programs in the former conflict areas, which have so far, paved the way for the people whose livelihoods were affected due to terrorism, to regain their lost human rights and to find ways and means to rebuild their lives.
As a result, Sri Lanka is now well on the path to reconciliation between the communities. The normalcy that has returned in the country, particularly in the north and east, is the most cogent evidence of this outcome. The OHCHR however seems to be conveniently ignoring this fundamental fact in its haste to portray anything and everything that is happening in Sri Lanka, as being done with hidden, unacceptable or even malicious motives.
They also stubbornly refuse to acknowledge that it is only now that the human rights that were denied to the people in the north for over 30 years have been restored. Today, the people in the north enjoy the human right to live peacefully and without being under the constant threat of a despotic terror leader.
They also enjoy the right to associate one another without hindrance; the right to go to school and to be educated; the right to engage in livelihood or to do a job of their choice; the right to engage in religious activities, without fear or favour; the right to have access to decent healthcare; the right to travel without hindrance; the right to read newspapers, books and journals and to watch television; the right to engage in sporting and leisure activities; the right to enjoy the comforts of ordinary life with electricity, water, good roads, etc.; the right to live with dignity, without being used as a human shield; the right to cultivate without the fear of land mines; the right to enjoy normal family life, without having to sacrifice children as “child soldiers” to foster terrorism; the right to engage in political activity and choose leaders in a democratic framework.
Albeit late, and perhaps even reluctantly, the OHCHR must surely concede that all those rights are also basic human rights which were deprived to the entire population in the Northern Province of Sri Lanka for nearly three decades. It may also be helpful, if the OHCHR and the UN acknowledges that it was the actions and the wide-ranging initiatives of the Sri Lankan Government at a massive cost and effort, that made it possible for the above human rights to be restored, and that it was not due to any ‘technical advice’ of the OHCHR or others.
Not an exact science
The learned experts of the OHCHR may also need to acknowledge that ‘reconciliation’ is not an exact science or subject that could be set out in a report, with predetermined parameters. It cannot also be a ‘cut and dried’ or ‘one-size-fits-all’ process where deadlines can be set by foreign ‘experts’ as per foreign ‘recommendations,’ ‘resolutions’ or ‘technical advice,’ ignoring the cultural, internal and local dynamics that are at play.
The OHCHR must, at least as this late stage, also realise that ‘reconciliation’ is a relative concept, and that the process must necessarily be carried out at a pace and in a framework that the body politic of the particular country could absorb. It cannot also be ‘imposed’ from outside according to a foreign timetable, or decree. Such formulae almost always end in disaster, and when that happens, it is not the ‘technical advisors’ who suffer, but the people of the country that has been subjected to the process driven by outside forces.
The ‘know-all’ attitude that is being displayed by the OHCHR in the case of Sri Lanka is all the more strange, since the OHCHR should have surely learnt from history, that the ‘victors’ of World War II occupied the ‘vanquished’ countries for over 12 years after World War II, and that a powerful and wealthy nation is still struggling to bring about reconciliation within its own different communities, more than a century after its internal civil war!
Accountability
It is also time that the OHCHR is reminded that in the case of accountability too, Sri Lanka has made enormous strides over the past few years. Within just one year of the end of the conflict, a Lessons Learnt and Reconciliation Commission (LLRC) had been established by the President of Sri Lanka. Such Commission which comprised of very eminent persons in Sri Lanka had prepared and submitted its Report and recommendations within 1½ years.
The Report had been tabled in Parliament and funds voted by Parliament at the earliest opportunity for the implementation thereof. A high level team under the chairmanship of the Secretary to the President had been entrusted with the responsibility of implementing the LLRC recommendations, and his team is now continuing its operations in earnest. The progress is reported in a website for purposes of transparency and accountability. Recently, another Presidential Commission has also been established to probe into alleged disappearances and abductions during the conflict period. Their report is also due to be completed in a few months.
"It is highly regrettable that the OHCHR is ignoring the favourable outcomes in Sri Lanka, and is continuing to ‘cherry-pick’ a few unsubstantiated, unverified, or anonymous reports, to make sweeping allegations against Sri Lanka’s record of reconciliation and accountability. It is now becoming increasingly clear that this stance and attitude of the OHCHR is quite selective, and is based on its quest to buttress the expected resolution that is to be introduced by certain North American and Western nations at the next UNHRC session in March 2014 against Sri Lanka
By failing to acknowledge the actual ground conditions in Sri Lanka, the OHCHR is indirectly confirming that it is carrying out a ‘contract’ to somehow establish some lapse or wrongdoing on the part of Sri Lanka, in order to fulfil the aspirations of its undisclosed masters. That position is reaffirmed by the fact that the OHCHR, continuously and shamefully, refers only to certain selected reports, (often where the names of the authors are not revealed), or particular incidents, (often where the sources are not identified or revealed), or carefully planted anti-Sri Lanka studies, (often where the identities of the financiers who commissioned such studies are not publicised)
Recent developments and events at the UN have also highlighted the serious accountability, transparency, and governance issues at the UN, with scores of unresolved internal corruption cases piling up. That situation has led many to remark that it would be more prudent for the UN to apply mechanisms within the UN system and benchmark successes, before attempting to offer ‘advice’ to sovereign nations
The UN and OHCHR reports of the past have also contained extensive factual inaccuracies, and matters that seem to have been deliberately taken out of context. In addition, many relevant matters which have been favourable to Sri Lanka have been conspicuously left out. Therefore, in the next OHCHR Report too, that unfair and biased standard could be expected to be followed. That is why the Sri Lankan authorities must not, and should not expect a fair or helpful report from Navi Pillay"
At the same time, several members of the Sri Lanka Armed Forces have been under investigation for various alleged offences, and the persons found guilty have been punished in accordance with the law. The offences committed by various LTTE terrorist cadres have also been investigated and documented, and nearly 12,000 of such LTTE cadres and nearly 600 child soldiers of the LTTE have been rehabilitated and released, although many have been found to have been guilty of grave offences.
In addition, a large number of offences allegedly committed by the Indian Peace Keeping Forces (IPKF) during the period that the IPKF operated in Sri Lanka have been documented, although no punitive action has been instituted or pursued. Such a course of action may have been followed by the Sri Lankan authorities perhaps because it has been the intention of the Sri Lankan authorities not to allow old wounds to fester, but to move ahead in a spirit of reconciliation and restorative justice.
Further, although credible suspicions and evidence has been available with the Sri Lankan authorities about the massive covert and overt terrorist funding operations of certain individuals of the Tamil diaspora who are presently living and working in North America and the West, the Sri Lankan authorities seem to have also not yet pursued legal action or demanded extradition of such terrorism financiers, due to its policy of pursuing a path of reconciliation amongst all communities.
It is now apparent that the realisation of the current laudable outcomes and the restoration of hitherto deprived human rights have already led to a high degree of reconciliation among the communities. It may also be accurate to state that such outcome has also been likely, due to the serious and dedicated efforts of the Government and the people of Sri Lanka through thousands of individual steps, actions and initiatives that were taken over the past 4½ years, which had enabled the country to progress rapidly towards the over-riding objective of reconciliation between the communities. In that regard, and for completeness sake, the Sri Lankan authorities may do well to remind the OHCHR about these initiatives.
Hostage rescue mission and demining
As is now being increasingly acknowledged, Sri Lanka carried out the largest-ever hostage rescue mission in the world in its entire history. Around 300,000 Tamil civilians who were held hostage in fear of their lives and used as human shields by the LTTE were rescued in the first half of 2009 and brought to safety.
Those persons suffered untold misery at the hands of the LTTE, being driven from different parts of the Northern Province to Nandikadal in the east coast of the Northern Province by the LTTE. However, due to the valiant efforts of the Sri Lankan forces, these persons were rescued and cared for. In this regard, it must be noted that as soon as various LTTE flanks that were holding these civilian hostages were breached due to the Sri Lankan leadership and armed forces’ advances, the civilian hostages moved en masse towards the Sri Lankan Armed Forces, thereby unambiguously confirming that the Tamil civilians viewed the Armed Forces of Sri Lanka, not as aggressors, but as their saviours.
The Sri Lanka authorities also successfully demined thousands of square kilometres of land, before the re-settlement of the rescued civilians could take place. As is well known, when the LTTE was retreating from different parts of the Northern Province towards Nandikadal, it buried about a million land mines across vast tracts of land in order to stop the Sri Lankan Armed Forces from advancing, as well as to stop their civilian hostages from going back to their own homes.
At that time, many in the ‘international community’ estimated that this complex and arduous demining operation would take more than 10 years to be concluded. However, the Sri Lankan authorities and Armed Forces, assisted by several international agencies, were able to complete the major part of this massive task in less than three years, thereby paving the way for the rescued civilians to be resettled in their own homes and villages, expeditiously. This demining effort, in such a short period of time, is considered to be an outstanding achievement, by persons who know the difficulties and dangers of the process of demining.
Resettlement
The huge task of re-settlement of the civilians, who had been rescued and accommodated in temporary villages with basic comforts, was another massive challenge that was successfully met by the Sri Lankan authorities. Here too, many international observers were of the view that Sri Lanka would perhaps take more than 10 years to complete this resettlement task. However, within a period of around three years, a very high proportion of the 300,000 civilians have been re-settled in their homes in accordance with the UN standards.
After the end of the conflict, the entire infrastructure in the conflict areas had been damaged or destroyed, and a massive rebuilding effort was implemented by the Sri Lankan authorities. Thousands of kilometres of roads, hundreds of kilometres of railway tracks, hundreds of government buildings, thousands of private dwelling houses, shops, factories, railway stations, hospitals, schools, court houses, and other infrastructure have been built. Electricity has been restored together with other communication facilities. As a result, the previous conflict areas now enjoy levels of infrastructure which is on par with other emerging districts in the country. The massive public investment that was needed for this purpose had been generously provided by the Government, in a massive amount of more than US$ 3 billion in a four-year period.
It must also be recollected that at the time of the end of the conflict, more than 12,000 ex-LTTE cadres who had been responsible for murders, bombings, kidnappings, extortion and other crimes were under arrest, and in the custody of the Government. There were also nearly 600 child cadres of the LTTE who were rescued from the clutches of the LTTE.
Spirit of goodwill and reconciliation
In a spirit of goodwill and reconciliation, the child soldiers were quickly reunited with their parents, and the ex-LTTE cadres were rehabilitated within a short period of time, set free, and allowed to reintegrate with society.
This gesture of the Government of Sri Lanka is one that is unprecedented after a military victory. This gesture is also completely contrary to what has taken place in wars where Western powers had been involved, where ‘enemy’ combatants had been incarcerated without trial, humiliated, hunted down mercilessly, tortured, urinated upon, water-boarded, set upon by dogs, and put to death after phony trials.
It must also be appreciated that the magnanimous gesture of the Government of releasing ex-combatants was all the more laudable because it was one that was sensitive and risky, since there was a danger that those who were released could resort to violence again. However, the quick restoration of livelihood which allowed many young ex-LTTE cadres to return to normal life, as well as the early restoration of political freedom, enabled their re-integration to take place effectively. As a consequence, not a single incident involving terrorism has occurred in the Northern Province or any other part of the country since the end of the conflict in May 2009.
This outcome is a compelling lesson that could perhaps be useful to the ‘victors’ of other recent military engagements, e.g. Iraq, Libya, Egypt and Afghanistan, where years after the so-called ‘victories,’ fresh acts of violence, bombings and horror continue each day, seriously affecting the people of those ‘liberated’ nations.
Political activity
Together with the restoration of normalcy and the emergence of conditions that provided space for political dialogue and discussion, Sri Lanka conducted presidential and parliamentary elections, local government elections as well as provincial council elections in the former conflict areas. Such elections were internationally acclaimed as being ‘free and fair’ and timely. That achievement too was a massive transformation, considering the fact that, for over 30 years, politicians from whatever ethnicity or race were unable to even visit the Northern Province, let alone engage in political activity.
Another important feature of reconciliation was the establishment of livelihood opportunities for the people of the former conflict areas. The quick restoration of the infrastructure as well as banking and other financial services enabled the people to establish their livelihood opportunities early. Today, the economic growth that has been experienced in these former conflict areas is considered by many as being nothing short of phenomenal. In fact, in 2012 and 2013, the Northern Province recorded the highest nominal economic growth in any Province in Sri Lanka, whilst the banking density too, rose to the highest levels in the country. New private sector investment is also now flowing into these areas, which augurs well for the future.
Sri Lanka also established the LLRC, within a year after the conflict, which interval was much shorter than the time it took South Africa to establish its own Truth and Reconciliation Commission. The LLRC report is now being implemented, and many notable achievements have already been recorded. Based on the record of the implementation so far, the Chairman of the implementing committee, the Secretary to the President, has openly challenged those who claim that not sufficient progress has been made, to name any other country which has made faster or greater progress after their own internal conflicts, than the progress made in Sri Lanka!
Shockingly biased
In this background, it is highly regrettable that the OHCHR is ignoring the favourable outcomes in Sri Lanka, and is continuing to ‘cherry-pick’ a few unsubstantiated, unverified, or anonymous reports, to make sweeping allegations against Sri Lanka’s record of reconciliation and accountability. It is now becoming increasingly clear that this stance and attitude of the OHCHR is quite selective, and is based on its quest to buttress the expected resolution that is to be introduced by certain North American and Western nations at the next UNHRC session in March 2014 against Sri Lanka.
This contention is gaining further credence due to the fact that there is a growing suspicion in many circles that the efforts by the OHCHR and certain North American and Western countries are due to the strong and well-funded lobby of the yet existing but newly-transformed LTTE international network that actively supported the three-decade terrorist campaign, in the past.
As is well known, this network, located largely in North America and the West, conducted a relentless campaign of propaganda, fundraising, and procurement of weapons and equipment, during the conflict. However, today, the very same individuals and the entities that funded and supported the ruthless terrorist acts in Sri Lanka have reinvented themselves. They now wear human rights masks and have taken the campaign against Sri Lanka to a different level, using ‘human rights’ as their new ‘weapon’. Accordingly, these terrorists-turned-human rights crusaders are now highly active in Western capitals, lobbying Washington DC, London, Brussels, Geneva, etc.
As a direct result of this well-funded lobby, the OHCHR also seems to be eager to oblige these terrorists-turned-human rights crusaders by unabashedly basing its reports on unsubstantiated events, un-collaborated stories and highly dubious photographs or film productions planted and concocted by the LTTE international network, in order to level charges against Sri Lanka. In that context, the authorities and people of Sri Lanka are now beginning to realise that the shockingly biased and one-sided stance of the OHCHR is primarily to appease the LTTE and help it to realise its mission which is to extract revenge from the Government for destroying their beloved LTTE terrorist movement.
Perhaps that background explains as to why in the past, many of the recommendations that have been made by the OHCHR were carefully structured to lead to serious discord, disunity, and displeasure amongst the communities In Sri Lanka, instead of promoting reconciliation and accountability in the country.
Accordingly, if the OHCHR were to follow their past stance in the future too, the next set of OHCHR recommendations would also probably be designed to achieve outcomes of a punitive nature, seeking revenge and retribution and thereby creating intense uncertainty and turmoil. That would be in contrast to the path that the Sri Lankan authorities has so far taken, which is one of restorative justice where the human rights to life, livelihood, education, health, justice, political and social activity, have been restored expeditiously, in order that the people of different communities could live in harmony and peace, rather than in continued animosity and hatred.
Ground conditions
It is also regrettable that the OHCHR has overlooked the fact that Sri Lanka is now experiencing a boom in its economy with economic growth being enjoyed in every part of the Island, particularly the former conflict areas, with people enjoying freedom and livelihood, and young people gainfully engaged in education, social and economic activities.
In this regard, the OHCHR also fails to acknowledge that Sri Lanka is a country which practices religious tolerance and coexistence, to a very high degree. In fact, Sri Lanka has more than 11,000 Buddhist temples, more than 4,300 Hindu kovils, more than 2,100 Islamic mosques and more than 1,200 Christian churches, where more than 50,000 members of the clergy of different religions co-exist in peace and harmony!
Sri Lanka also boasts of a highly independent and competent Judiciary, where any citizen has the right to invoke the Supreme Court on any matter where they believe their constitutionally guaranteed fundamental rights are violated. Sri Lanka is also a country with 65 registered political parties, and where 31 local TV channels, 60 local radio channels and 35 local newspapers are beaming, broadcasting and publishing news and other features, on a 24x7 basis. Articles and news items are published or beamed against the Government, politicians, officials and others, daily.
Further, for the 20.6 million people in the country, there are over 24 million mobile telephone connections in use, while about 30% of the population have access to unfettered internet facilities and access. These ground conditions are visible to all unbiased persons who visit Sri Lanka, who are almost always convinced that a vibrant atmosphere of freedom, democracy and openness prevails in the country.
Dubious stance
Maybe therefore Navi Pillay must be told that if conditions in Sri Lanka were as harsh and unacceptable as is being continuously portrayed by the OHCHR, it is highly unlikely that the outcomes as described would have ever taken place. Nor would Sri Lanka have made the major strides it has made in the economic, social and political spheres in recent times.
By failing to acknowledge the actual ground conditions in Sri Lanka, the OHCHR is indirectly confirming that it is carrying out a ‘contract’ to somehow establish some lapse or wrongdoing on the part of Sri Lanka, in order to fulfil the aspirations of its undisclosed masters. That position is reaffirmed by the fact that the OHCHR, continuously and shamefully, refers only to certain selected reports, (often where the names of the authors are not revealed), or particular incidents, (often where the sources are not identified or revealed), or carefully planted anti-Sri Lanka studies, (often where the identities of the financiers who commissioned such studies are not publicised).
That dubious stance of the OHCHR is further confirmed by its choosing to ignore the thousands of positive features that are prevalent in Sri Lanka, which are backed by facts, figures, visible development, comments by respected political and economic leaders, and the reports of those who study and report on comparative global developments.
As a result of this attitude and stance, which incidentally goes contrary to all UN norms, the OHCHR has lost all credibility in the eyes of the people of Sri Lanka. The OHCHR’s inner motives are also now exposed. In that background, the OHCHR has made it very difficult for the people of Sri Lanka to believe that any recommendations that will be made by the OHCHR in future will be for the benefit of the country or its people.
That is further aggravated by the dubious track record of the OHCHR, in many other global cases too, where it has applied double standards with gross impunity. Sadly, also the world now knows that the OHCHR has become the willing and malleable tool in the hands of certain powers, and is therefore following the instructions given by its master, without following the principles of governance and accountability that would be expected from an international organisation of the stature and influence of the OHCHR.
UN injustice
In that regard, recent developments and events at the UN have also highlighted the serious accountability, transparency, and governance issues at the UN, with scores of unresolved internal corruption cases piling up. That situation has led many to remark that it would be more prudent for the UN to apply mechanisms within the UN system and benchmark successes, before attempting to offer ‘advice’ to sovereign nations.
In fact, even the so-called ‘Panel of Experts’ of the United Nations’ Secretary General (UNSG) in relation to Sri Lanka is highly irregular and controversial, as the legality of the UNSG’s appointment of a ‘Panel of Experts’ is in serious doubt. That is because the establishment of such Panel was not one that was called for by the UN and was supposed to be established only for the UNSG’s own appraisement.
However, after taking that first deceptive step, the UN inflicted further injustice upon Sri Lanka, by making the UNSG’s ‘Panel of Experts’ Report which was mainly based on hearsay and ‘evidence’ of unnamed sources, to be made a ‘public’ document, from which all Sri Lankan bashers today freely quoted from. By such actions, the UN has mischievously, illegally and cunningly subjected Sri Lanka to international scrutiny, without any substantiated or corroborated evidence of violation of any international laws! So much for good governance, impartiality accountability and justice!
The UN and OHCHR reports of the past have also contained extensive factual inaccuracies, and matters that seem to have been deliberately taken out of context. In addition, many relevant matters which have been favourable to Sri Lanka have been conspicuously left out. Therefore, in the next OHCHR Report too, that unfair and biased standard could be expected to be followed.
That is why the Sri Lankan authorities must not, and should not expect a fair or helpful report from Navi Pillay. Therefore, the Sri Lankan authorities must immediately challenge the OHCHR and now state the key fact that no other country has been able to achieve a higher degree of reconciliation and accountability in such a short time, after a prolonged period of conflict, such as that which has been achieved by Sri Lanka.
The Sri Lankan authorities must also demand that the OHCHR provides it with any other case study or studies where a more robust or tangible reconciliation and accountability has taken place in any country in such a short period of time, than in Sri Lanka.
That would probably get the neutral voters of the UNHRC thinking!
