tw news-features

by Namini Wijedasa

The outgoing chairperson of the Human Rights Commission Radhika Coomaraswamy has warned President Mahinda Rajapakse that Sri Lanka will find it increasingly difficult to defend itself before international treaty bodies if the country does not speedily reactivate the Commission once its members leave on April 3.

Funding bodies have already told the outgoing Commission, informally, that they will not provide financing for vital activities until a new commission is set up.

Coomaraswamy — who is leaving for New York to take over as Special Representative of the UN Secretary General for Children and Armed Conflict — has reminded President Rajapakse that the HRC’s five commissioners will leave next week at the end of their term. She has called for new members to be appointed as soon as possible, saying that, without them, the HRC cannot issue recommendations and summons or finalise inquiries.

“There will be a real crisis,” she stresses. “It may be necessary to consult lawyers to see what can be done in the interim.”

The HRC is the latest victim of an all-round political failure to reappoint the Constitutional Council, which is responsible for nominating members to the independent commissions. The Public Service Commission and the National Police Commission have lapsed; the three member Judicial Service Commission is functioning with one member: the Election Commission was never appointed.

“The Constitutional Council must be appointed as soon as possible for the sake of the smooth running of the HRC,” Coomaraswamy said. “In addition, the Government of Sri Lanka will find it increasingly difficult to defend itself before international treaty bodies.”

The decision of funding agencies to withhold assistance for the HRC’s strategic plan pending the constitution of a new commission has serious consequences for ongoing projects, Coomaraswamy says. One of them is a programme to clear a backlog of complaints, for which the HRC has already hired retired judges.

“We cannot arbitrarily discontinue their services,” she asserts. “The Treasury may have to release funds to continue with that programme and we hope to consult with Minister Mahinda Samarasinghe on these issues. We may also have to speak to the UNDP to ensure that funding is continued.”

Coomaraswamy also warns that the HRC is in a legally tenuous position. “Though it is constituted under the 17th Amendment, its powers and functions are set out by statute,” she elaborates. “Therefore, it is often treated by the Treasury and the Courts as a public enterprise or a government department.” The HRC must be given the legal protection of a fully independent commission, she states, recommending that the necessary constitutional amendments be passed through Parliament.

The other commissioners are Deepika Udagama, N Selvakkumaran, Cressida Senanayake and A Zainudeen. When they took office in March 2003, these members formulated a strategic plan for the HRC. Coomaraswamy says they managed to implement much of it. [Source: Island]
[TamilWeek Mar 26, 2006]

Statement by Asian Human Rights Commission

“Sri Lanka will find it increasingly difficult to defend itself before international treaty bodies if the country does not speedily reactivate the Commission once its members leave on April 3.”

In a news item published in the Island on March 29, 2006 outgoing chairperson of the Human Rights Commission of Sri Lanka, Radhika Coomaraswamy, confirmed that the terms of office of the Commission members would expire on April 3, 2006. Like the other commissions created under the 17th Amendment to the Constitution, the Human Rights Commission of Sri Lanka will be without commissioners because the Constitutional Council, which has the power to appoint the commission members, is defunct due to a failure to appoint Constitutional Council members. Like the National Police Commission, Public Service Commission, Judicial Service Commission and the Election Commission, the Human Rights Commission will be without independent leadership and will come under the direct control of the government. The very purpose of the Human Rights Commission of Sri Lanka was to create an independent body to monitor the state agencies in their performance of human rights, to investigate violations of rights by using its own mechanisms, to recommend corrective action for individual rights violations, and to make recommendations for the improvement of human rights within the country.

From April 3 there will be no legally empowered body to perform these tasks.

There are a large number of cases before the Human Rights Commission of Sri Lanka which are pending in lieu of inquiries. These cases relate to torture, disappearances, extrajudicial killings, undocumented migrant workers and other human rights violations. In recent months, retired judges and other persons of seniority have been recruited to ensure that inquiries are conducted with greater competence and independence. Dr Coomaraswamy, in her interview, has stated that the funding bodies have informed the Commission that they will not provide finances for its activities until the new commissioners are appointed. The work of many of the departments of the Commission is dependent on funding from outside sources and if this funding is stopped, there will be serious problems regarding the employment contracts of the employees and consultants of the Commission.

Dr Coomaraswamy is also reported to have warned President Rajapakse “that Sri Lanka will find it increasingly difficult to defend itself before international treaty bodies if the country does not speedily reactivate the Commission once its members leave on April 3.”

The Asian Human Rights Commission (AHRC) is of the opinion that the real problem facing the Human Rights Commission of Sri Lanka, as well as other commissions that are now without commissioners, is the government’s deliberate attempts to place the commissions under its direct control and to discourage the monitoring of government agencies in any form.

This is a concerted attempt to introduce a degree of authoritarianism such as that incorporated by the 1978 Constitution. The origin of the Human Rights Commission can be traced to the enormous local and international pressure surrounding the gross human rights abuses of the 1980s, when the executive president was created by the 1978 Constitution to prevent independent control. The creation of the Human Rights Commission of Sri Lanka in the early 1990s and the passing of the 17th Amendment to the Constitution in 2001 were attempts to introduce some semblance of accountability into the system. However, these have now been removed. The AHRC reiterates that the result of this action will be to greatly increase the prevalence of corruption, to enhance the capacity of human rights abusers by creating an environment of impunity and to make the lives of ordinary people increasingly difficult. We urge the public to take up this matter, despite any disappointment regarding the performance of the Human Rights Commission, because the removal of the services that the Commission provides, no matter how limited, will only make the situation worse.

In recent years the Human Rights Commission has embarked on ambitious ventures to promote a serious stance on the prevention of torture. In recent months the Commission’s senior officers conducted inquiries into torture cases and made recommendations to the Attorney General for the prosecution of officers under the CAT Act (Act No. 22 of 1994). This move resulted in a lot of resentment and Dr Coomaraswamy was quoted last year in REDRESS, an international magazine, as saying “the police don’t like us [Human Rights Commission]”. It is clear that certain sections of the government do not favour investigations into the policing system either by the Human Rights Commission or the National Police Commission.

It is only strong public intervention aimed at the reactivation of the Constitutional Council that will restore the minimum mechanisms available within the Sri Lankan system, to protect basic rights.

[Full text of Statement by the Asian Human Rights Commission]

by D.B.S. Jeyaraj

The largest concentration of Sri Lankan Tamils outside Sri Lanka is in Canada. More than 250,000 Tamils live in Canada now. Of these more than 200,000 Tamils are in the Greater Toronto area. Toronto is the largest “Sri Lankan Tamil” City in the Global Tamil Diaspora. The Tamil population here is larger than those in North - Eastern cities and towns like Jaffna, Batticaloa, Vavuniya, Trincomalee etc.

It was predictable therefore that the Human Rights Watch report released on March 15th caused great waves within the Tamil community of Greater Toronto.The 45-page report authored by HRW Advocacy director of Chldren’s rights Jo Becker dealt with fund raising for the LTTE and was titled , “Funding the “Final War:” LTTE Intimidation and Extortion in the Tamil Diaspora”.The report focussed on London in Britain and Toronto in Canada. The Tamil Diaspora in these two Countries amount to nearly half of the total number of Tamils living in the West.

The reaction among Canadian Tamils was manifold. Though the LTTE and its minions try to project an impression that the community is 100% behind the LTTE the truth is different. About 15to 20% are hard core tiger supporters while another 10 to 15% are firmly opposed to the LTTE. The rest are of many mindsets. Most feel strongly as Tamils but differ in their degrees of support or opposition to the LTTE. Many do not support the tigers on every issue but generally support the Tamil cause and feel that they are necessary to combat the Sinhala state. Others disapporove of tiger actions but are equally or more opposed to Sinhala racist ideology. Some have “Canadianised” strongly and are just not bothered about anything concerning the “ole” country.

So when the HRW report was released the various strands in the community reacted differently. This response was of two kinds. One was openly articulated and public while the other larger response was among the people themselves and kept private. This column has repeatedly referred to a vociferous pro - tiger minority hogging the megaphone and posing off as the sole voice of the Tamils within the Canadian Tamil Diaspora. This phenomenon was once again present.

An organization calling itself the Canadian Tamil Congress issued a stinging press release. Earlier there was an outfit claiming to represent Canadian Tamils that called itself the FACT. (Federation of Associations of Canadian Tamils). This outfit was clearly identified by the USA and Canadian authorities as a tiger front. Thereafter the FACT went out of circulation and in its place there arose the CTC. In keeping with typical LTTE style the CTC accused the HRW and Jo Becker of bias and pooh poohed the report.

The CTC also held a press conference that was attended largely by Tamil “community representatives”. In fact the 70 to 80 Tamil “community leaders” vastly outnumbered the genuine media representatives present. Significantly enough the much maligned HRW sent a representative as an “observer” to the press conference but was refused admission. The press conference was used by many speakers to attack the HRW and Ms. Becker personally evoking cheers and applause from the “packed” audience.

What was astounding about the tiger and pro - tiger response to the HRW report was the brazen attempt to deny the whole thing. Every member of the Tamil Diaspora knows that fund raising goes on. Many Tamils do give money willingly to the LTTE. Some are “pressured” to give more. Others are coerced into giving. While some Tamils have never been asked for money almost everyone knows of at least a few instances of money being collected and the intimidation involved.

A rational response by the tiger and pro - tiger elements could have been to “admit” to a little bit of fund raising going on but deny that it was widespread. They could also have said that the money was raised for humanitarian purposes and not to fund the LTTE war chest. On the question of intimidation they could have denied it and said action would be taken against anyone found guilty if evidence was presented.

Given the fact that fund raising along with some force and intimidation in some instances does exist within the community attempting to deny the obvious was like the Tamil saying about trying to conceal a whole pumpkin in a plantain leaf of rice. Yet this exactly was what the pro - tiger sections tried to do.Instead of being on the defensive and engaging in intelligent damage control the tiger minions went on the offensive and took on the HRW and Ms. Jo Becker crudely and rudely.

This flagrant attempt to deny the obvious , discredit the HRW and distort reality did not go down well with many members of the Tamil “Silent Majority”. What was mostly resented was the pro - tiger elements trying to interprete the HRW report as affecting the entire community. It was not. The HRW report affected only those supporters and workers of the LTTE engaged in fund raising. It did not affect the community at large in any way. In fact the report brought to light the pathetic predicament faced by Tamil Canadians at the hands of some of their “imagined” kinsfolk. Many Tamils found their non - Tamil colleagues being sympathetic and considerate towards their plight after details of the HRW report became known.

It was apparent that the LTTE and its minions were in a state of “disconnect” with the bulk of Tamil Canadians. Most Tamils were a little upset but not unduly troubled by the HRW report . The uppermost thought in their minds was that this publicity could make the tiger cohorts go “slow” or go “soft” in their fund raising.

[Prime Minsiter Paul Martin visiting Markham’s Cedarwood Public School, in the aftermath of 2004 tsunami, where about two-thirds of the student body is Sri Lankan - CP]

While most Tamils do feel strongly about the Tamil plight and recognize the need for fund raising they resent the heavy handed, rough methods of the fund raisers. Many are sympathetic towards the “boys and girls” bearing arms for the Tamils but hate these parasitical fund raisers.

Adding fuel to this resentment is the fact that many Canadian Tamils are suspicious about the bona fides of some of these LTTE fund raisers. They are also uncertain as to how much exactly is actually going to the LTTE in Sri Lanka. It is an open secret that many Tamil businesses are funded by the local LTTE. Tiger acolytes also engage in direct wholesale business using money collected from the people. In order to corner the market and drive out competition a large amount of money is used to undercut others. This “subsidy” is from the people’s donations.

Several tiger fund raisers have been given houses, cars and even paid salaries out of money collected here. There is also much corruption and several operatives without any overt source of income are living iit off grandly. Some top tiger operatives have often been “fired” on charges of graft by the movement.Also some senior fund raisers are given 10 to 20% commission of money collected as an incentive. There is no accountability.

So the ordinary people remained unruffled even as the tiger operatives careered around like headless chickens. Though the LTTE was trying to make out that a great calamity had befallen Canadian Tamils most members of the community were privately happy that those professing to represent the LTTE in Toronto had been given a jolt. There was also hope that the tigers would be careful at least in the future not to harass or intimidate Tamils. Many people were prepared to donate to the cause but resented the intimidation and corruption.

One of the most comical responses came from LTTE political Commissar Suppiah Paramu Thamilselvan who denied fund raising abroad. Funny if the LTTE does not get money from the Diaspora where then does it get its money? Furthermore Thamilselvan charged the HRW of not approaching them to get the LTTE side of the story. LTTE political affairs committee member and self - styled Toronto Tamil spkesperson Nehru Gunaratnam also lamented to the media that community leaders had not been interviewed and only alleged victims had been interviewed.Does the LTTE expect the HRW to interview them about the victims and not the victims themselves?

[Ms.Jo Becker, at a Toronto presentation of report titled “Living In Fear: Child Soldiers and the Tamil Tigers in Sri Lanka”, in December 2004 - Pic by Tamil Canadian]

In any case Thamilselvan was not correct in saying the HRW had not contacted the LTTE. According to HRW circles the researcher /writer Ms. Jo Becker had sent more than one e - mail to Prabakharan alias Pulidevan the head of the LTTE peace sscretariat requesting a LTTE reponse to some questions . These were ignored. She had also contacted Santhan the head of the British Tamil association in London.The BTA is the British Pro - tiger organization. He had declined to be interviewed. He also refused to arrange for a meeting with LTTE ideologue Mr. Anton Balasingham.

In Canada Mr. Sittampalam president of the World Tamil Movement was interviewed. The WTM like the FACT is an accredited front organization of the LTTE. Mr. Sittampalam denied that the LTTE was active in Canada or that money was being raised on its behalf. Mr. Sittampalams response was duly recorded in the HRW report with a commentary note that testimonies from the Tamil community dispute this assertion.

Thus it could be seen that the HRW did make an effort to get the LTTE version of events too. Mr. Thamilselvan is not telling the truth when he says the tigers were not contacted by the HRW. The LTTE by ignoring the HRW has by default lost a good opportunity to present their side of the picture.Likewise Mr. Nehru Gunaratnam is also wrong in saying that the so called community leaders were not interviewed because the WTM president was interviewed. Perhaps Mr. Gunaratnam does not regard Mr. Sittampalam as a Tamil community leader.

One of the biggest challenges posed by the HRW to the LTTE was the ready availability of its report in Tamil. In 2004 December when the report on Child Soldiers in the LTTE was released the HRW made it available in Tamil. This was the case now also. The full report was available on the net and also hard copy. Though the LTTE media took great pains to criticise and condemn the report without publicising its contents to the Tamil people many went direct to the web and downloaded it. Copies were made and distributed.Other community activists also distributed copies to those who needed it.

Thus most people in the Tamil Canadian community who wanted to read the report had obtained a copy by the end of the week. With the LTTE media thundering against the report many people were eager to read it themselves. The HRW report was perhaps the most widely read “document” among Canadian Tamils in recent times that was critical of the LTTE. Many recognized in the report’s anecdotal evidence , similiar experiences they personally underwent themselves at the hands of fund collectors . Soon people were talking excitedly about the hated tiger fund raisers being exposed. Some said” if they (HRW) had contacted me I would have told them more”.

Once again the “disconnect” between the LTTE activists and ordinary Tamil people became blatantly visible. While the people were appreciating and endorsing contents of the report among themselves the tiger minions were ranting and railing against the HRW and denying that fund raising was going on. The fact that the “silent majority” confirming the HRW report could not come forward openly speaks volumes about the “terror ” inflicted upon the community. The HRW report itself explains this clearly. Yet the LTTE too was unable to get any prominent “Non - Tiger” Tamils to speak out against the HRW. Many engaging in the orchestrated anti - HRW campaign are recognized tiger sympathisers and supporters.

With some critics raising questions about the HRW methodology and credentials of Ms. Jo Becker the HRW came out with a press release clarifying those matters. It also highlighted some provisions already mentioned in the report but conveniently ignored by the tiger elements. This statement was depicted as a HRW admission of guilt. The HRW was “backtracking” the LTTE gloated. This was simply not true and served to illustrate the depths to which the tiger acolytes can sink in maligning their perceived opponents. The HRW continues to stand by its report and has not backtracked at all.

The HRW also opened up space on its website for comments and suggestions about the report. Instead of utilising an opportunity to express legitimate , constructive criticism about the report an orchestrated campaign was once again underfoot to malign and slander the HRW and Ms. Becker. But very soon the non - tigers and anti - tigers jumped in to the fray.

It was thereafter a verbal free for all. The report and its contents were forgotten. Totally irrelevant issues were raised. Foul language was used. Charges and counter charges prevailed. It was another missed opportunity for tiger supporters to convey their views effectively. One thing however was clear. The tigers and their supporters have lost the monopoly they once had over cyberspace.The HRW comments section also illustrated the fact that the community had lost its ability to conduct an intelligent, coherent, civil discussion on crucial issues.

The LTTE also launched a massive letter writing cum e - mail signature campaign against the HRW. “model” letters were drafted and copied to be sent to HRW. Though LTTE organs have boasted about 20,000 plus letters being sent the actual number barely exceeded three digits at first. Later the LTTE was forced to take special steps to send letters in bulk. One reason for people being reluctant to petition the HRW was because they knew that the otganization was telling the truth. Also people did not believe the tiger allegation that the HRW had mala fide motives in compiling the report.

While the LTTE smirked in myopic satisfaction about the HRW backtracking it would be pertinent to see what impact the report has had on Canadian mainstream media. Given the prestige enjoyed by the HRW in North America the report was given much publicity. Apart from the wire services reports the CBC radio and main newspapers also gave much coverage. The CBC devoted time to the report in its “Metro Morning” “Current” and “Ontario Today” programs. Ms. Jo Becker and CTC spokesperson David Poopalapillai were interviewed. So too were some Tamil residents including this columnist.

Newspapers like the “Globe and Mail” “Toronto Star” and “National Post” also gave coverage. Editorials were written urging the authorities to ban the LTTE in Canada. The “rightist” National Post urging a ban was nothing new as it has done so in the past. But the bitter lesson for the LTTE was the role of “Toronto Star” Canadas largest circulated newspaper. The Star is a liberal pro - immigrant, pro - minority journal. Yet that paper urged a ban. It also focussed on this fund raising even before the HRW report and had a centre spread article. While giving space to the pro - LTTE rebuttals the “Star” also gave prominence to a little known non - tiger group that welcomed the report.

In its editorial of March 16th the “Star” had a sly dig at those in the community saying that there was no tiger activity in Canada. If that was the case then banning the tigers need not make anyone object the “star” suggested tongue in cheek. If the LTTE acolytes in Canada had any sense they should take serious note of the “Star” leader. The fact that such a reputed liberal newspaper could urge a ban demonstrates how low LTTE stock is with the Canadian mainstream. The writing may be on the wall for the LTTE in Canada if the “Star” response is an indicator.

The security certificate issued against former WTM administrator Suresh Manickavasagam in 1995 cited him as a LTTE fund raiser. That order issued under sec 40 of the Immigration Act was signed by the then Immigration Minister Sergio Marchi and Solicitor - General Herb Gray. It was subsequently upheld by Federal Court Judge Max Teitelbaum. This was a clear instance where the Canadian executive and Judiciary regarded the LTTE as “terrorist” and fund raising as an offence.

After the Sep 11th 2001 twin tower bombings the UN suppression of terrorism act was passed in Canada too. Under this act financing of terrorism was expressly forbidden. The LTTE was listed under this law and funding the tigers was made illegal. Canada also passed a rigid anti - terrorist law called the Anti - Terrorism Act or C - 36.

More than 30 foreign organizations were banned under that law but not the LTTE. Though security agencies had recommended a ban it was put on hold. It was reported then that the former Foreign Affairs Minister Bill Graham had persuaded his cabinet colleagues not to ban the LTTE as the organization was engaged in a peace process and that a ban may affect it.

This was under a Liberal party Government. Now the Conservatives are in power. Two present Cabinet ministers have while in the opposition called for a ban on the LTTE . They are Peter MacKay the Foreign Affairs Minister and Public Safety Minister Stockwell Day.

Interestingly enough these are the two ministers who would have a key role to play in determining which organizations are to be banned under the terrorism act. Mr. Day was foreign affairs critic when in the opposition and consistently called for a LTTE ban.Mr. MacKay called for a ban during the Parliamentary polls campaign but “muted” his views because of pressure from Toronto region candidates.

[L-R] Liberal Candidates Roy Cullen, John Cannis and Jim Karigiannis at a CTC organized debate in Jan 2006 - Photo TamilNet]

Since there is a substantial Tamil voting bloc in about ten to twelve ridings or electorates Conservative candidates including one of Sri Lankan origin did not want to upset the LTTE. This was under the mistaken impression that the LTTE controls Tamil voters in Canada. Once again the vociferous minority hogging the Tamil megaphone had created that illusion. In actual terms this was not true. Except for some hard core tiger supporters most Tamil voters decided independently. These decisions were based on a number of issues affecting them as “Canadians” and not on a single “Tamil” based issue.

The LTTE elements who had been backing the Liberals in the past few elections switched sides this time and expressed support for the Conservatives. This was due to two reasons. One was the realisation that the Liberals were on the decline and that the Conservatives were the favourites. So they jumped aboard the bandwagon.

 [Vincent Veerasuntharam, Conservative Party candidate in Scarborough Southwest in Federal Election 2006, paying tribute to Tsunami Victims at a Vigil held in Scarborough Town Centre on Dec 26, 2005]

The second was to influence the Conservatives and prevent harsh action against the LTTE. The electoral verdict however showed that the Greater Toronto region remained Liberal or New Democratic . The Conservatives did not fare well here because of the new immigrant, visible minority vote.

It remains to be seen therefore what the Conservative Government will do. Some weeks ago Mr. Day was asked about this at a press conference and he replied that the matter was being looked into. This was before the HRW report. The situation is different now.

What the report has done is to inform mainstream Canada about the activities of the LTTE and about how a segment of Canada’s population is being victimised by a group claiming to represent them. The issue is about a section of Canada’s population being under “attack” in Canada. This is an assault on the freedom , rights and core values of Canada.

In a sense the issue has moved beyonde the realm of foreign policy. What is at stake here is the violation of the law and basic tenets of human rights. This is now a Canadian issue. The hardhitting Editorial by a liberal newspaper like “The Toronto Star” is an index of how progressive mainstream opinion views the problem. If the LTTE wants to stave off a future ban it needs to undertake a massive damage control exercise.

Unfortunately those who claim to support the LTTE have shown themselves incapable of gauging or meeting the challenge. They have only been able to engage in predictable antics. Accusing the HRW of ulterior motives and colluding with Colombo, denigrating the integrity and efficiency of Jo Becker, Denying that fund raising takes place, attacking people suspected of providing information as anti - tiger or mercenaries, derisively mocking their perceived critics etc. is what they are doing now.These cheap puerile tactics may win them applause among tiger supporters but will not help their cause in any way.

The LTTE has also commenced its usual intimidatory tactics. Many people suspected of helping the HRW are being attacked in their media. Threatening telephone calls are also being made. This columnist too is at the receiving end. Though I was not involved with the HRW report and references to me in the report were taken by the HRW from an open letter I wrote in 1996 the tiger media has started vilifying me. The usual anonymous calls are also on. If this “intimidation” was intended to make me back off it has been counterproductive.

What these elements failed to comprehend was that I had no connection to the report and I had planned initially to remain aloof from commenting about it. I revised my decision and started writing extensively for three reasons. One was the vilification campaign and threats like the challenge issued by the LTTE website “Nitharsanam” that it would slander and defame me if I wrote anything.

Secondly was my disgust at the conduct of some Canadian Tamils denying the fund raising itself and defending the indefensible. Thirdly I was angered by the attacks launched on Ms. Jo Becker and the HRW for having written a truthful report and felt they should be supported publicly. As long as the LTTE launches vituperative attacks I would continue espousing this HRW report.

The LTTE is yet to learn that “Bullying” does not always pay. In December 2004 the HRW released a report on Child Soldiers. A meeting was held at the Scarborough Civic Centre. A gang of pro - tiger hooligans invaded the place and constantly heckled Jo Becker. Even former Ontario premier Bob Rae was prevented from addressing the meeting for a long time. An enraged Rae exclaimed that in his 25 years of public life he had never undergone such an experience.

[Bob Rae Chair and President of Forum of Federations, met S.P. Thamilselvan in Kilinochchi in August 2004]”

But did the LTTE supporters gain anything by this show of force? Instead of being cowed into silence the very same Jo Becker has come out with another HRW report. Still the LTTE supporters continue with their intimidatory tactics. This has resulted in many people coming forward with their experiences and the truth. For the first time perhaps four Tamil persons in Toronto were bold enough to sign an open letter with their real names criticising the LTTE and endorsing the report. More than one person was emboldened to speak out feely to the media.

Realistically however one cannot see the fund raising end unless and until a satisfactory political settlement is reached in Sri Lanka. Those committed tiger supporters as well as Tamils yearning for an end to the oppression of the Sinhala state would keep on giving money for the Tamil cause. This is understandable.

The problem however is in adopting coercive tactics to make people give more or to make those unwilling give.If tiger agents desist from intimidating the unwilling and harassing the incapable and rely only on their diehard supporters for money then there would not be any major problem.

The Tamils who took up refuge in Canada should not be victimised by an organization claiming to represent them.They are now Canadian citizens and bound by the laws of their adopted Country. The Canadian state should extend every protection to its citizens and this includes the Tamil Canadians too. [TamilWeek Mar 26, 2006]

Senior legal practitioners from the Bar Associations of Jaffna, Kayts, Point Pedro, Chavahachheri and Mallakam met in Colombo marking the first such meeting in over two decades for the legal practitioners from the northern province. Some 28 lawyers attended the legal education workshop held at the Hotel Renuka recently and the focus was on promoting public interest litigation. The workshop was co-organised by the Jaffna Bar Association under the active leadership of Ms. Shantha Abhimanasingham and the Asia Foundation, and was supported by British High Commission’s Global Conflict Prevention Pool.

Chief Justice Hon. Sarath N. Silva, addressing the participants highlighted the workshop as a momentous event. He spoke on the important contribution made by the senior practitioners to the courts in the northern province and highlighted legal issues of special importance to Tamil speaking people in Sri Lanka. He commented on the need to encourage more young Tamil speaking people to become professionally qualified in law and also spoke on the importance of promoting public interest litigation as a means of promoting and ensuring people’s rights.

Jaffna lawyers attend conference on public interest litigation in Colombo. Ms. Shantha Abhimanasingham in her address said that this was the first time that lawyers from the North had the opportunity to participate in a legal education workshop of this nature. She spoke on the hardships faced by the lawyers and how they valued the opportunity provided by the workshop to interact with senior practitioners of the calibre who participated. A distinguished panel of speakers addressed the lawyers including Justice H.S. Yapa, Mr. S.S. Wijayaratna, Mr. C.R. De Silva, Mr. K. Kanag-Isvaran P.C., Mr. Mohan Peries P.C., and Mr. R.K.W. Goonasekera. A wide range of topics were dealt with including “The Jurisdiction of the Provincial High Court”, “Alternative Dispute Resolution”, “Admissions and Confessions”, “Injunctions”, “Writs” and “Public Interest Litigation”.

The lawyers engaged in important discussions on laws and legal situation pertaining to language rights and ownership of houses within the high security zones. This is the first of a series of workshops and follow up workshops will be held in Jaffna and Colombo during the course of this year. [Source: British Highcommission News] [TamilWeek, Mar 26, 2006]

Erik Solheim, Norwegian Minister of International Development in a wide ranging interview to Indian magazine Tehelka has said Norway is supporting Tamil right to self-rule in Sri Lanka. Text of the interview as follows:

The Sri Lankan government was against holding the talks in Norway, as demanded by the Tigers. They insisted that talks be held in Sri Lanka or in some Asian country. How did the two parties agree on Geneva finally?

The two parties agreed to meet after being convinced that the ceasefire agreement must be upheld to prevent further escalation of the situation. Norway reassured the parties of its readiness to facilitate talks wherever they agree to meet. They agreed on Geneva on a suggestion from the facilitator. Switzerland has always, in their eyes, played a constructive role and maintained an unbiased approach in the peace process.

What was the agenda for the talks?

Negotiations in Geneva were not means to end the conflict, but it is very positive that the parties agreed to discuss how to improve the serious security situation.

You have held talks with both the parties. What are the major complaints and grievances on each side?

The main complaints relate to the high level of killings, abductions and violence over the last month. But I cannot paraphrase the parties’ positions on these matters.

Do you believe a negotiated solution is possible, given the history of aborted agreements and failure of peace initiatives in the last five decades between the Sinhalese and the Tamils?

I sincerely believe in a negotiated political solution. The Norwegian government is committed to actively promoting peace and reconciliation internationally. We will continue to give priority to facilitating the peace process in Sri Lanka as long as the parties request our efforts and we see that we can play a constructive role. I hope that the parties gain mutual confidence to take the peace process forward. There is clear pressure on President Mahinda Rajapakse from his allies, the Janatha Vimukthi Peramuna and Jathika Hela Urumaya, not to concede even the most basic demands of Tamils. Both parties favour a solution within a unitary state structure, a departure from former Prime Minister Ranil Wickremasinghe.

With Rajapakse dependent on them for survival, how meaningful can talks be?

I cannot in my position as third party facilitator involve myself in political issues regarding internal dynamics on either side.

Do you think a solution is possible within a unitary state structure?

I take the view that the parties should not be blinded by the use of different terms and find a solution acceptable to all Sri Lankans.

What in your view are the legitimate grievances of Tamils?

There is broad agreement in the international community on support for Tamil rights to some form of self-rule or power sharing within a united Sri Lanka.

Do you agree with the view that trouble started with the controversial Ceylon Citizenship Act in 1948 disenfranchising thousands of Tamils, the declaration of Sinhala as official language, and the subsequent laws in education favouring the Sinhalese etc, resulting in the alienation of Tamils?

Both parties would have a different take on this issue. Norway is tasked to bring the parties to the table and assist them in finding a durable solution to the conflict. We have to be careful in our comments on historical matters, however important they may be.

There is a view that the eu will revoke its travel ban on LTTE cadre post-Geneva talks. Do you see that happening?

Norway is not a member of the eu and thus not involved in eu deliberations. We do not have an official stance on this issue.

The Sri Lankan government’s proxy war against the LTTE through the Karuna group is said to be the main cause for the escalation in violence. Has the government given any assurance of disarming Karuna?

Both the government and the LTTE have reassured that they will do their utmost to stop violence. The Lankan military has been harassing civilians, triggering an exodus of Tamil refugees to India. The Sri Lanka Monitoring Mission too has attested this.The parties are committed to end the campaign of violence.

What did the LTTE’s Prabhakaran tell you?

Prabhakaran promised to do his part to put a stop to the escalating violence. He reaffirmed his commitment to the peace process and a peaceful solution.

The US seems to have taken a pro-Sinhala stand. The recent statements of Under Secretary Nicholas Burns and Ambassador Jeffrey Lunstead betray their bias.

Many governments, including the US, expressed their support to the parties ahead of the talks. We are encouraged by the support of India, US and others to Norway’s involvement as facilitators.

What was the outcome of your recent Indian visit and meetings with NSA MK Narayanan and Foreign Secretary Shyam Saran?

India has always been supportive of the peace process and of Norway as facilitator, and reiterated its support during the meetings. Norway will continue to keep India informed throughout the process. [TamilWeek Mar 26, 2006]

Related: -JVP reiterates firm ‘No” to Norway facilitation
-New Norwegian Peace Envoy Hanssen - Bauer takes over
-Tehelka Clarification, Apr 7, 2006

“Government’s willingness to do something is only due to a necessity” - Senior LTTE member Balakumaran

Our long struggle enduring economic hardships has now awakened the international community but Sinhala seem to have not realized it. Today if the Sinhala government is showing a willingness to do something it’s only due to a necessity that has arisen,” says Senior LTTE member K.V. Balakumaran in an interview to Thiankkural, a leading Tamil daily published from Colombo.

Talking in Kilinochchi to the widely read newspaper, the former EROS leader who has been a long time confidante of the LTTE leader V.Pirabaharan said “Even though they are coming for the talks due to this necessity, we are not attending them with sureness either”.

He spoke of the LTTE views to the newspaper on current political conditions and the approach of international community; excerpts as follows:

“You can see the Liberation Tigers amidst the currents of a favorable breeze from the international community these days. If we continue to keep talking at the peace table, we may be cajoled into and even be removed from the list of ‘terrorist’ organizations. Getting off this list is among our priorities. Our desire is for who ever called us ‘Terrorists’ will one day to call us that we are not that. This will give us a boost for the long haul.

But we cannot journey on this long path laden with oppression and atrocities. Continuing to talk under these circumstances will be in vain. We too have certain time limitations and how much longer to reign in. Our National Leader will determine the course of those. He knows when, where and what move to make. The Tamil aspect has presented a time frame to the International Community and the Sinhala side. We can be accused that this interval is to buy weapons and boost the rankings of our troops. In the meantime the international community may deem that we will continue to be at the Peace table.

But that is not our intent. Our purpose is how the people of Thamil Eelam could apply this period to their aspirations and put forward the stance. You are now seeing the results of this position.

Today the Sinhalese stand in terms of the international community, seems to be of a defensive posture. Even the Sinhala side realizes this very well. What will the Sinhalese do in these circumstances? Therefore they will prefer only to move to a situation where there are neither talks nor war. But even this will be one day be jeopardized by JVP. This is why Mahinda is trying taking all the Southern political parties along with him.

Q: How do you view the mention of the paramilitaries in the US State Department Human Rights Report?

A: The more authentications we get, the more we will keep talking – this seem to be the belief of the international community. We could view this as an incentive to keep on just doing that. However the truth is that this should have been done long time ago. We are being accused of enlisting children to our forces. However no one cared when embryos were killed in 1958. Today we are compelled to pay a heavy price to arrive at this juncture.

Q: What do you think of the Geneva agreements…could we anticipate that they will be implemented?

A: We are not waiting in the hope that the Geneva agreement will be implemented.

The Tamil people have been at this ‘receiving end’ of promises by the truck loads. We have been given assurances since 1918. What happened to the Sinhala pledge that Tamil representation will be given (for Tamils) in the Western Province. This dilemma continues to date. From 1918 through the agreements reached in Geneva, the timespan is filled with broken promises and barren pledges.

But as a liberation movement we never lost our conviction. We know how to solve this without inflicting anguish and agony to our people. That’s what we are striving for. Concurrently we are not going to bungle from our deep seeded commitments either. We will not move away from our goal. Without laying down the arms and not losing sight of our ultimate aim, we continue to participate in the peace process. Nobody can drive us away from this. [TamilWeek Mar 26, 2006]

[Thinakkural interview by R.Bharathi] - [Translation by TW news-features]
_____________________________________________________
‘We support Tamil right to self-rule in Sri Lanka’ ….- Erik Solheim